survey report on overseas business operations by ......transportation equipment (excl. automobiles)...

Results of the JBIC FY2020 Survey

Survey Report on Overseas Business Operations by

Japanese Manufacturing Companies

Copyright© 2021 Japan Bank for International Cooperation All Rights Reserved.

We would like to express our deep gratitude to all the companies who cooperated in this survey as COVID-19 has a great impact on the socio-

economic situation. We hope that the results of this survey will serve as a reference for future business activities.

This report is made to serve as a reference for the research and discussions of the JBIC. The views expressed in this report do not represent

the official position of JBIC. Copying of this report without the consent of JBIC is strictly prohibited. JBIC shall not be held liable for any damages

that may occur from the use of this report.

Copyright© 2021 Japan Bank for International Cooperation All Rights Reserved. １

Table of Contents

1 Survey Overview

2 Overseas Business Performance

3 Business Prospects and Promising Countries/Regions

４ Special Theme #1 – Impact of COVID-19 on Supply Chain

５

Appendix

p.２

p.６

p.13

p.35

p.41

p.47

Special Theme #2 – Prospects for SDGs


1. Survey Overview

Copyright© 2021 Japan Bank for International Cooperation All Rights Reserved. 3

(1) Survey Overview1

Chart 1-2.

Number of Responding Companies (Capital, Non-Consolidated)

1. Objective and Targets

This survey aimed to research and analyze the current status and

future prospects for the overseas business development of the

Japanese companies. The companies targeted in this survey are

Japanese companies which have three or more overseas affiliates

(including at least one production base).

2. Number of Surveyed Companies and Methods

(1) Number of surveyed companies: 954

(2) Methods: Questionnaires were sent via post and emails.

During the survey period, telephone interviews were also performed.

3. Responses

(1) Number of respondents: 530 companies (168 by post, 362 online)

(2) Response rate: 55.6%

4. Survey Period

August 21, 2020 (surveys sent) to September 30, 2020 (deadline)

(*Responses received by November 12 are counted as valid)

5. Survey Items

(1) Survey Overview

(2) Overseas Business Performance

(3) Business Prospects and Promising Countries/Regions

(4) Impact of COVID-19 on Supply Chain *

(5) Prospects for SDGs *

(Items with asterisks (*) indicate this year’s independent topics)

Note: In this survey, automobiles, electrical equipment & electronics, chemicals, and general machinery

industries are collectively referred to as “4 major industries”. “Chemicals” combines “chemicals

(including plastics)” and “pharmaceuticals.” The respective totals for “automobiles,” “electrical

equipment & electronics,” “general machinery,” and “precision machinery” combine “assembled” and

“parts.”

Note: In this survey, small and medium-sized enterprises(SMEs) are defined as a company with a

capital of less than 1 billion yen.

Automobiles20.2%

Chemicals14.0%

Electrical Equipment & Electronics

12.3%

General Machinery 9.2%

Precision Machinery 6.0%

Metal Products 4.9%

Food 4.2%

Textiles 3.8%

Nonferrous Metals 3.6%

Steel 3.6%

Transportation Equipment (excl. Automobiles) 2.6%

Petroleum & Rubber 2.5%

Ceramics, Cement & Glass 1.9%

Paper, Pulp & Wood 1.7%

Other9.6%

530companies

(companies)

Industry Type FY2019 FY2020 Proportion

Automobiles 109 107 20.2%

Chemicals 88 74 14.0%

Electrical Equipment & Electronics 83 65 12.3%

General Machinery 59 49 9.2%

Precision Machinery 30 32 6.0%

Metal Products 28 26 4.9%

Food 23 22 4.2%

Textiles 23 20 3.8%

Nonferrous Metals 26 19 3.6%

Steel 17 19 3.6%

Transportation Equipment

(excl. Automobiles)16 14 2.6%

Petroleum & Rubber 13 13 2.5%

Ceramics, Cement & Glass 8 10 1.9%

Paper, Pulp & Wood 10 9 1.7%

Other 55 51 9.6%

Total 588 530 100.0%

(companies)

Paid-in Capital FY2019 FY2020 Proportion

Less than ¥300 mn. 127 119 22.5%

¥300 mn. up to ¥1 bn. 79 81 15.3%

¥1 bn. up to ¥5 bn. 127 107 20.2%

¥5 bn. up to ¥10 bn. 66 60 11.3%

¥10 bn. or more 168 142 26.8%

Holding company 21 21 4.0%

No response 0 0 0.0%

Total 588 530 100.0%

Chart 1-1. Number of Responding Companies (Industry)

68.9%

60.9%57.3%

54.5%

44.6%

31.7%26.5%

39.1%42.7% 45.5%

55.4%

68.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 (FY)

4

1

Note: Plot of the headquarters address of the responding companies

Headquarters Location Listed/Unlisted (this year)Number of Times (last 5 years)

Source：This map was prepared by JBIC based on ”CraftMAP.”


(2) Survey Overview (Profile of Responding Companies)

Chart 1-3. Profile of Responding Companies

Chart 1-4. Change in Methods

Tokyo180, Osaka69, Aichi48, Kanagawa29, Hyogo26, Hiroshima22, Kyoto16, Saitama16, Nagano16, Shizuoka13, Shiga11, Okayama８,

Tochigi８, Toyama８, Chiba７, Ishikawa６, Kagawa６, Gunma６, Gifu４,

Fukui４, Mie４, Ehime３, Fukuoka３, Yamagata３, Ibaraki 2, Tokushima 2,

Niigata 2, Yamanashi 2, Tottori１, Nara１, Fukushima１, Hokkaido１,

Miyazaki１, Wakayama１

…50～

…20～49

…10～19

…5～9

…～5

(# companies: 530)

Listed, 290companies,

55%

Unlisted, 240companies,

45%

530companies

Five times in a row 266companies

50.2%

Four times 111comanies

20.9%

Three times 61comanies 11.5%

Twice 51companies

9.6%

Once (First answer) 41companies

7.7%

530companies


1

1. Overseas business slows down sharply and the recovery from COVID-19 impact is expected in 2023

This year’s survey was conducted under the influence of the COVID-19 in addition to the US-China conflict. It seems that the supply chain was disrupted in Japan and overseas simultaneously due to the lockdown implemented in each country, and its impact was beyond short-term inventory adjustment. According to this survey, overseas production ratio has dropped sharply from 36.8% to 33.9%, which is almost same as 10 years’ back, and the recovery is expected in 2023 at this moment. Against this backdrop, manufacture's willingness to strengthen and expand overseas business in near future dropped dramatically from 71.4% to 59.3%, the lowest level since the survey started.

2. China returned to the top of the promising countries ranking and new countries of interest have been emerged

Regarding promising prospects for business operations over the next three years, China overtook India and returned to the top position again. It seems that COVID-19 divided the light and dark, that is, China was quick to resume economic activity while suppressing the spread of infection, while in India the economic slowdown was worsening due to a long-term lockdown, which reversed the lead. In the ASEAN region, Vietnam was particularly promising as it was last year. In addition, it is noteworthy that the previously inconspicuous countries such as Bangladesh attracted attention was also a feature of this year's ranking.

3. Supply chain reinforcement is underway, “local production for local consumption” is the keyword for after COVID-19

According to this survey, the impact of COVID-19 on the supply chain was the greatest from April to May in 2020, and it is now being resolved. As for the regional breakdown, China and ASEAN seemed to be more affected than Japan and the US, reaffirming the importance of the production network in this region for Japanese manufacturers. Each company intends to continue investing to strengthen its supply chain in preparation for the next pandemic, but few respondent are thinking reshoring to Japan, therefore supply chain reinforcement will be conducted with maintaining its overseas activities. Among them, a certain number of companies answered that they have decoupled the supply chains between the US and China, and some have the intention to do so. In this regard, in the so-called "after Covid-19 (or after Trump)" world, it is suggested that the reorganization of supply chain to “local production for local consumption” type production network is being recognized as one of the promising solutions.

4. Almost half of the companies are challenging to accommodate SDGs under the growing social awareness

Regarding the relationship between the SDGs and the manufacturing industry, this survey found that almost half of the companies are working on the SDGs in some way, such as business strategy and CSR. Many companies have chosen "increasing interest from consumer, buyer and industry“, “self motivated" and “RM with investor" as their motives, which implies growing awareness of stakeholders of all industrial sectors. This survey also implies this awareness is trickling down to the supply chain activities of SMEs. Lastly, a certain number of companies who acknowledge themselves as “no introduction” of SDGs selected some of the “current” activities relating to the SDGs goals simultaneously, which implies the Japanese manufacturers’ potential approach toward SDGs materiality.

5. Companies are trying to overcome this situation with adopting new framework

In our process of conducting this survey, there were quite a few voices recognizing that the Covid-19 and the US presidential election as a game changer. Although the situation is very volatile and it is difficult to draw a picture of the mid-term business, some are looking for a shift and optimization to a “local production for local consumption” production network to adapt this new business environment and some are putting more resources on their network digitalization. Other than these, we found that the efforts to rediscover corporate value using a new framework of SDGs have begun.

(3) Summary


2. Overseas Business Performance

7

(1) Basic Data: Number of Overseas Affiliates２

◼ The number of overseas affiliates in FY2019 continues to increase. In addition to China and ASEAN, production bases increased in North

America, EU, India, Central and Eastern Europe, etc.

• The total increase in the number of overseas affiliates in FY2019 was 230 (production 89, sales 80, R&D 7, regional headquarters 5, other 49) and the total decrease was 108 (production 45, sales 45, R&D 7, regional headquarters 0, other 11). Overall in FY2019, the number of overseas affiliates continues to increase.

• Looking at the results by region, the turnover of companies is active in China. When it comes to ASEAN10, production bases have seen a net increase in each country including Vietnam. Likewise, the increase in production bases is also noticeable in EU, India and Central and Eastern Europe. Sample opinions regarding the future outlook include; "We are considering the transfer of ASEAN regional headquarters from Thailand to Vietnam in anticipation of future demand increase” (electrical equipment & electronics).

• In North America, sales and other bases increased significantly, which were both due to the acquisition of local companies by some companies.


Chart 2-1. Number of Overseas Affiliates (Increases and Decreases in FY2019) Chart 2-2. Distribution of Overseas Affiliates

<Classifications of Chinese Regions in this Survey>

North-East (Heilongjiang, Jilin, Liaoning)

North (Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Shandong)

Eastern (Shanghai, Jiangsu, Anhui, Zhejiang)

Southern (Fujian, Guangdong, Hainan)

Interior (Provinces other than the above, autonomous regions)

※Taiwan and Hong Kong are counted as NIEs3.

<Regional Definitions in this Survey>

NIEs 3 (Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong)

ASEAN 5 (Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines)

ASEAN 10 (ASEAN 5 + Vietnam, Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, and Brunei)

North America (US, Canada)

EU 14 (Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Greece, Luxembourg, Denmark,

Spain, Portugal, Austria, Finland, Sweden, Ireland)

Central and Eastern Europe (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria,

Romania, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina,

Republic of North Macedonia)

(1) One or more overseas affiliates for production

Country/AreaNo. of respondents

(company)Proportion

1 China 385 73.2%

2 Thailand 253 48.1%

3 North America 215 40.9%

4 Indonesia 174 33.1%

5 India 127 24.1%

6 Vietnam 122 23.2%

7 Mexico 105 20.0%

8 Taiwan 103 19.6%

9 EU14 96 18.3%

10 Malaysia 94 17.9%

11 Korea 91 17.3%

12 Philippines 79 15.0%

13 Brazil 53 10.1%

14 Central & Eastern Europe 47 8.9%

15 Singapore 44 8.4%

(2) One or more overseas affiliates for sales

Country/AreaNo. of respondents

(company)Proportion

1 China 296 56.3%

2 North America 256 48.7%

3 Thailand 184 35.0%

4 EU14 159 30.2%

5 Singapore 148 28.1%

6 Taiwan 141 26.8%

7 Hong Kong 129 24.5%

8 Korea 116 22.1%

9 Indonesia 106 20.2%

India 106 20.2%

11 Vietnam 104 19.8%

12 Malaysia 81 15.4%

UK 81 15.4%

14 Mexico 78 14.8%

15 Brazil 62 11.8%

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70(companies)

･Afric

a

･Mid

dle

East

･Ru

ssia

Rest o

f Euro

pe &

CIS

Tu

rkey

Centra

l & E

aste

rn E

uro

pe

UK

EU

14

･Eu

rop

e T

ota

l

Oth

er

Bra

zil

Mexic

o

･La

tin A

meric

a T

ota

l

･No

rth A

meric

a

･Rest o

f Asia

& O

cean

ia

･Ind

ia

Myanm

ar

Vie

tnam

Philip

pin

es

Mala

ysia

Indon

esia

Th

aila

nd

Sin

gap

ore

･AS

EA

N10

To

tal

Hong K

ong

Ta

iwan

Kore

a

･NIE

s3

To

tal

Inla

nd C

hin

a

South

ern

Chin

a

Easte

rn C

hin

a

North

ern

Chin

a

North

easte

rn C

hin

a

･Ch

ina T

ota

l

Increase(230 companies)

Decrease(108 companies)

Production

Other

R&D

Sales

Regional Headquarters

8

２

◼ Overseas production/sales ratios in FY2019 declined significantly, recovery is expected around 2023.

• Overseas production ratio for FY2019 was 33.9% and the overseas sales was 36.2%, recording the largest drop ever. Although the level of overseas

sales ratio until the previous year was close to 40%, sales and production were significantly affected by the spread of COVID-19 toward the end of the

fiscal year. Therefore, the overseas sales and production ratios, which had been on an upward trend until the previous year, have returned to the level of

10 years ago. In the future, the overseas production ratio is expected to reach 34.6% in 2023. Although this does not reach the pre-COVID-19 level, a

gradual recovery is expected.


Reference: Contribution to the decline

in overseas production ratio

(FY2018-2019 / by industry)

Note: Calculated by weighting the rate of decline from last year based on the number of companies responding to this year's survey.

Note 1: Calculation methods of various indicators (all consolidated basis)

・Overseas Production Ratio = Overseas Production / (Domestic Production + Overseas Production)

・Overseas Sales Ratio = Overseas Sales / (Domestic Sales + Overseas Sales)

Note 2: Each of the ratios in the graph is a simple average based upon the values reported by responding companies.

Note 3: Surveys were not performed of overseas sales ratios in 2003 and 2005.

Chart 2-3. Trends in Overseas Production/Sales Ratios (FY2001 onwards, all industries)

(1) Basic Data: Overseas Production/Sales Ratios

27.9%

29.1%

33.5%34.0%

34.7%

34.2%

34.7%

34.2%

35.4%

37.5%37.9%

39.6%

38.5%

39.3%

38.7%36.2%

35.6%

24.6%

26.0% 26.1%

28.0%

29.2%

30.5%

30.6%

30.8% 31.0%

33.3%

31.3%

32.9%

35.2%

35.1%

35.6%

35.0%

35.6%

36.8%

33.9% 33.2%

34.6%

20%

22%

24%

26%

28%

30%

32%

34%

36%

38%

40%

42%

44%

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (FY)

Overseas Sales Ratios

Overseas Production Ratios

Actual

FY2020Projected

Medium-term plans (FY2023)

Industry Type

General Machinery -0.7

Chemicals -0.6

Automobiles -0.6

Food -0.5

Metal products -0.5

Other -0.4

Electrical Equipment & Electronics -0.2

Steel -0.2

Ceramics, Cement & Glass -0.1

Paper, Pulp & Wood 0.0

Textiles 0.1

Nonferrous Metals 0.1

Precision Machinery 0.1

Petroleum & Rubber 0.2

Transportation Equipment 0.3

Total -2.9

Contribution to

the decline

9

(1) Basic Data: Overseas Production/Sales Ratios by Industry２

◼ Overseas production ratio fell in almost all industries.

• Overseas production/sales ratios declined in each industry. But the degree of decline varies depending on the type of industry. Overseas production ratio

declined comparatively high for the following industries; electrical equipment & electronics (42.5%→40.6%), chemicals (35.1%→30.9%) and general

machinery (33.9%→26.3%), while the decline in automobiles was less (44.1%→42.1%).

• According to an analysis of “the contribution to the decline in overseas production ratio” (see the previous page), of the 2.9 points that fell, the influence of

major industries such as general machinery, chemicals, and automobiles was large (0.6 to 0.7 points), and electrical equipment & electronics (0.2 points)

remained relatively small. In the interview, some pointed out that "In China during the Chinese New Year, a certain amount of inventory was added before

the production was stopped due to the pandemic, so the impact was limited." However, the fact that Wuhan, which is a center of automobile and related

industries, was affected at an early stage seems to be the background of these affected industries.


Chart 2-4. Trends in Each Index by Industry (FY2010 onwards)

3. Chemicals 5. Food

4. General Machinery 6. Textiles

1. Automobiles

2. Electrical Equipment & Electronics

33.4%

39.4%43.0%

44.6%

46.8%46.2% 46.3%

44.8%

42.1% 41.4%42.3%

36.0%

38.8% 42.2%43.6%

47.1%46.2%46.7%

44.1%

43.4% 42.2%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23

24.2%25.0%

28.0% 28.5% 30.0%

27.1%28.2%

35.1%

30.9%30.2%33.4%

30.1%31.1%

35.7%37.5% 38.1%

36.4%37.5% 37.5%

35.1%35.6%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23

20.4%

18.6%16.5%

18.3%16.0% 17.2%

19.7%

28.9% 18.0%19.5%

22.5%

18.4%

19.5% 18.3%21.7%

16.4%19.0%

21.4%

30.2%

16.4% 17.7%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23

35.6%39.0%36.3%35.9%36.0%

38.8%42.2%43.6%47.1%

46.2%46.7%44.1%43.4%42.2%35.0%36.1%32.6%34.8%33.4%

39.4%43.0%

44.6%46.8%

46.2%46.3%44.8%42.1%41.4%42.3%

10%20%

30%40%

50%60%

070809101112131415161718192023

Overseas Sales Ratios

Overseas Production Ratios

(Projected)

(Projected)

(Projected)

45.2%

43.3%

48.6%

41.9%

45.4%

42.9%44.0%

42.5%40.6% 40.4%42.0%

45.1%42.8%

48.1%

47.4%48.5%47.2% 46.8%

45.1%43.8% 43.1%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23

24.3% 25.2%23.7%

29.9%27.4%

24.4%

28.7%

33.9%

26.3% 26.6%28.0%

43.2%39.9%39.2%

45.0%43.7%

39.6%

42.1% 42.0%

37.4% 36.8%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23

49.8%

48.2%

53.7%55.4%

49.8%

55.0%

59.8%

55.0% 57.1%

56.1%

57.9%

18.2%18.6%

26.7%26.1%

27.6% 27.5%31.0%

30.2%32.0% 32.0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23

(Projected)

(Projected)

(Projected)

※Changes in the composition of responding companies had a great influence on FY2019.

10

(2) Performance Evaluations: Net Sales/Profits Satisfaction by Major Countries/Regions

２

◼ Satisfaction dropped significantly due to COVID-19• Satisfaction with business performance in FY2019 fell to 2.50 in net

sales and 2.47 in profits, far below expectations. However, in the interviews, many companies said that they added the impression of COVID-19 to their evaluations. It seems that not only the results in FY2019 but also the impact of COVID-19 at the end of the year affected their evaluation.

◼ China is performing well amid overall stall

• As for the profit satisfaction by region, many countries have declined

from the previous year. In particular, the declines in India (2.58→2.31)

and Thailand (2.88→2.43) are conspicuous, but there were some

opinions pointing out the economic slowdown as a proceeding

problem before COVID-19. On the other hand, China has recovered

slightly. It was said that “It feels good with the financial support of the

Chinese government in addition to the breaking out of COVID-19."

(general machinery).

• In Mexico (2.58→2.26), the evaluation was significantly dropped

mainly in the automobile industry due to the economic slowdown.

Moreover, the performance of the EU14/UK (2.82→2.44), which was

expected to recover, was also sluggish.


Which of the following applies to your company's FY2019 net sales and profits

when compared with initial targets? (by countries/regions) 1. Unsatisfactory, 2.

Somewhat unsatisfactory, 3. Can't say either way (almost the same as initially

planned), 4. Somewhat satisfactory, 5. Satisfactory

Question

Chart 2-5. Satisfaction with Net Sales/Profits (Total Average)

Chart 2-6. Satisfaction with Profits (by Region)

Note: Please see the

appendix p.49 for detailed

data for each country/region.

Note 1: These figures are simple averages of assessments by country and region.Note 2: Numbers in parentheses indicate the increase/decrease over the previous year’s assessments.

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

3.00

3.20

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

China

Total

ASEAN 5

India

(Average score)

(FY of performance)

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

3.00

3.20

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Vietnam (Reference)

Philippines

Singapore

Total

Thailand

Malaysia

Indonesia

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

3.00

3.20

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

North America

Total

Mexico

Brazil

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

3.00

3.20

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Central & Eastern Europe

Turkey

Total

EU15

Russia

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

1. Asia 2. ASEAN 5 3. Americas 4. Europe/Russia

(FY of performance) FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019

Net Sales 2.56 (▲0.10) 2.67 (+0.11) 2.75 (+0.08) 2.70 (▲0.05) 2.50 (▲0.20)

Profits 2.61 (▲0.01) 2.65 (+0.04) 2.68 (+0.03) 2.63 (▲0.05) 2.47 (▲0.16)

1718

Central & Eastern Europe

Turkey

Total

EU14/UK

Russia

11

(2) Performance Evaluations: Reasons for Satisfactory Profitability by Major Countries/Regions

２

◼ Strong companies were supported by steady costs reductions and

full-scale operation of manufacturing facilities

• Regarding profitability satisfaction, the results of this year‘s survey showed that “good

performance of sales in the country/region" decreased, while the number of companies

that answered “cost cuts via consolidation of manufacturing" increased. It seems that,

except in China, cost reductions are covering the deterioration of the sales environment

even while profitability satisfaction is generally declining. In the interviews, it was pointed

out that “Last year, market conditions were good and raw material costs could be managed

down. However, labor costs are still rising" (chemicals).

• At the same time, “manufacturing facilities brought fully on line” increased in China and

India. In the interviews, some companies pointed out that “We are going to strengthen the

existing bases to improve production capacity" ,“in addition to the order from other

countries, there are strong inquiries from Chinese domestic market, so the Chinese

business is going well“ and “We are considering the introduction of factory automation”.

(electrical equipment & electronics, transportation equipment, etc.)

• In ASEAN5, many of the respondents answered “Exports are going well".


Chart 2-7. Reasons for Satisfactory Profitability

Note: Companies that answered “4. Somewhat satisfactory” or “5. Satisfactory” were asked for the reasons on a region/country bases. The percentages represent the ratios of each choice to the total

number of responses (shown in parentheses under the fiscal year of performance) for reasons given for the relevant region/country. Multiple answers allowed.

China India ASEAN5 North America EU14/UK

1.Good performance of sales in the country/region

2. Good performance of exports in the country/region

3. Successful cost cuts (personnel, materials, etc.)

4. Manufacturing facilities brought fully on line

5. Foreign exchange gains (including effects ofYen rates in consolidated accounting)

■

▲

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（101）

2016

（112）

2017

（122）

2018

（88）

2019

（92）

(FY of Performance)

(Companies)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（18）

2016

（21）

2017

（31）

2018

（27）

2019

（18）

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（180）

2016

（184）

2017

（207）

2018

（186）

2019

（118）

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（104）

2016

（88）

2017

（71）

2018

（75）

2019

（49）

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（61）

2016

（53）

2017

（48）

2018

（50）

2019

（25）

12

(2) Performance Evaluations: Reasons for Unsatisfactory Profitability by Major Countries/Regions

２

◼ Many countries/regions faced declining demand due to COVID-19

• Continuing on from the previous year's survey, many respondents answered “shrinking

market due to economic fluctuations” ,increasing in India (20.8%→39.3%) and ASEAN5

(19.4%→34.6%). In the interviews, many companies pointed out that “Customers could

not be secured due to the recession" (precision machinery), “There was an impact of

lockdown at the end of the fiscal year" (automobile parts); it seems that the impact of

COVID-19 was also the reasons. Another question revealed that the production impact

was already disappearing, but the demand impact was likely to remain.

◼ "Difficulty in cutting costs" declined in China and India

• The percentages of “difficulty in cutting costs", “demand for discounts from customers”,

and “difficulty in getting customers" were decreasing. Especially in China and India, the

decline in “difficulty in cutting costs" was large, but it was pointed out that “The impact of

market fluctuations was huge and it was a bigger problem than cost reduction".


Chart 2-8. Trends in Reasons for Unsatisfactory Profitability

Note: Companies that answered “1. Unsatisfactory” or “2. Somewhat unsatisfactory” were asked for the reasons on a region/country bases. The percentages represent the ratios of each choice to the

total number of responses (shown in parentheses under the fiscal year of performance) for reasons given for the relevant region/country. Multiple answers allowed.

ASEAN5India North America EU14/UKChina

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（281）

2016

（219）

2017

（195）

2018

（213）

2019

（200）

(FY of Performance)

(Companies)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（110）

2016

（91）

2017

（95）

2018

（72）

2019

（89）

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（510）2016

（426）2017

（405）2018

（402）2019

（448）

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（141）

2016

（149）

2017

（170）

2018

（161）

2019

（160）

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2015

（96）

2016

（80）

2017

（86）

2018

（83）

2019

（97）

1. Difficulty in cutting costs (personnel, materials, etc.)

2. Not brought fully on line right after establishment

3. Demand for discounts from customers

4. Difficulty in getting customers (intense competition)

5. Shrinking market due to economic fluctuations

6. Decreased competitiveness of products due to a strong yen

7. Foreign exchange losses (including effects of yen rates in

consolidated accounting)


3. Business Prospects and Promising Countries/Regions

71.9

55.8

54.8

38.2

15.6

4.5

-

-

-

-

72.9

45.8

40.0

45.0

17.9

-

8.8

5.8

5.8

3.3

0 20 40 60 80 100

Increasing added value of products

Acquiring new customers

Developing new business

Enhancing production facilities in Japan

Increased exports

Reshoring of supply chain

Olympic-related demand

Inbound Tourism

Securing foreign personnel

Other

FY2020

FY2019

14

(1) Future Business Expansions: Stance Regarding Strengthening/Expanding Business (Domestic/International)

３

◼ “Maintain present level" of overseas business has increased significantly

• 37.9% of companies answered that they would "maintain present level" in their overseas business. It is a significant increase of 11.2 points from the

previous year. Along with this, the ratio of "strengthen/expand" dropped sharply to 59.3%. Especially for SMEs, the ratio of "maintain present level" was

48.0%. In the interview, one automobile parts company said “We will minimize overseas investment because of COVID-19".

◼ Domestic business is weakened, but “Increasing adding value of products", “Developing new business" and

“Enhancing production facilities in Japan" are still popular

• Regarding the mid-term prospects for domestic business expansion, the number of companies that answered “strengthen/expand” decreased to 38.9%,

and “undecided” increased to 7.2%. “Maintain present level (50.4%)” and “scale back (3.5%)” were at the same level as last year. The popular ways to

strengthen/expand are “increasing adding value of products (71.9%)", " developing new business (54.8%)", " enhancing production facilities in Japan

(38.2%)" etc., while "reshoring supply chain” was limited to 4.5%.


OverseasChart 3-1. Mid-Term (Next 3 Years)

Prospects for Overseas Business Expansion DomesticChart 3-2. Mid-Term (Next 3 Years)

Prospects for Domestic Business Expansion

All companies All companiesSMEs Ways to strengthen/expand

domestic businessLarge enterprises

Question Responding companies were asked about their mid-term (next 3 years) prospects relating to their overall domestic and overseas businesses.

(623) (592) (582) (562) (509)

76.6%72.1%

75.6%71.4%

59.3%

23.0%26.7%

22.9%26.7%

37.9%

0.5% 1.2% 1.5% 2.0% 2.8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Scale back/withdraw

Maintain present level

Strengthen/expand(FY)

(195) (195) (196)

69.2% 66.2%

50.0%

28.7%30.8%

48.0%

2.1% 3.1% 2.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2018 2019 2020(FY)

(623) (591) (577) (568) (514)

34.0%37.7%

45.9%42.8%

38.9%

58.3%55.2%

48.7%50.2%

50.4%

3.5% 3.6% 2.3% 3.2%

3.5%

4.2% 3.6% 3.1% 3.9%7.2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Undecided

Scale back


Strengthen/expand(FY)

(387) (367) (313)

78.8%74.1%

65.2%

19.9%24.5%

31.6%

1.3% 1.4% 3.2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2018 2019 2020(FY)

71.9

55.8

54.8

38.2

15.6

4.5

-

-

-

-

72.9

45.8

40.0

45.0

17.9

-

8.8

5.8

5.8

3.3

0 20 40 60 80 100

Increasing added value of products

Acquiring new customers

Developing new business

Enhancing production facilities in Japan

Increased exports

Reshoring of supply chain

Olympic-related demand

Inbound Tourism

Securing foreign personnel

Other

FY2020

FY2019

15

(1) Future Business Expansions: Stance Regarding

Strengthening/Expanding Business (Domestic/International) Cross Analyses

３

◼ “Strengthen/Expand” of overseas business hits the

historical bottom

• The ratio of “strengthen/expand” of overseas business was 59.3%, which

was lower than after the 2008 financial crisis (65.8%) and set a new record

since the survey started. In addition, the gap between

"strengthen/expand“ ratio of overseas business and domestic business

has narrowed to 20.4 points, which is the lowest ever since last year. It

indicates that the proactive attitude toward overseas business is extremely

weak. However, depending on the measures against COVID-19 or the

economic recovery of each country, the attitude of strengthening and

expanding may recover.

◼ Overseas and domestic businesses coexist

• 93.7% of the companies that answered "strengthen/expand" for overseas

business, also responded "strengthen/expand" or " maintain present level "

for their domestic business. It seems that many companies continue to

strive to coexist overseas and domestic businesses.


Chart 3-5. Ratio of Companies that Responded

“Strengthen/Expand” for Overseas Business, at the Same

Time Responding “Strengthen/Expand” or ”Maintain

Present Level ” for Domestic Business

Chart 3-3. Shift in Intentions to Strengthen/Expand Business

(FY2000 - FY2020)

Chart 3-4. Cross Analyses of Prospects for Overseas and

Domestic Business

61.3%

20.4%

Domestic "Strengthen/Expand" ratio

38.9%

Overseas "Strengthen/Expand" ratio

FY202059.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(Difference) Overseas "Strengthen/Expand" ratio - Domestic "Strengthen/Expand" ratio



(FY)

No. of

respondent

companies

Proportion

Strengthen/expand 158 52.3%

Strengthen/expand Maintain present level 125 41.4%

302 Scale back 7 2.3%

(302 companies) Undecided 12 4.0%


Maintain present level Maintain present level 125 65.1%




Scale back/withdraw Maintain present level 8 57.1%



508 (n= 508 companies)

Medium-term Prospects (next 3 yrs. or so)

Overseas business Domestic business

87.9

81.8

86.488.1

89.8

92.8 93.294.9

93.2 93.7

75

80

85

90

95

100

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

(%)

(FY)

Note: Please see the appendix for detailed data per-industry.

20.4%


38.9%


FY202059.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20(FY)

65.8%

(568)(514) (22)(22) (23)(20) (87)(72) (58)(47) (79)(62) (106)(103) (29)(32)

All industries Food Textiles ChemicalsGeneral

Machinery

Electrical

Equipment &

Electronics

AutomobilesPrecision

Machinery

42.8%

38.9%

63.6%

40.9% 39.1%

20.0%

49.4%

45.8%37.9%

42.6%

45.6%

46.8%

29.2%

28.2%

65.5%

40.6%

50.2%

50.4%

27.3%

54.5%

47.8%

65.0%

43.7%

45.8% 55.2%

55.3% 49.4%

45.2% 59.4%

58.3%

27.6%

46.9%

3.2%3.5%

9.1%4.5%

8.7%5.0%

2.3% 4.2% 3.4%0.0%1.3% 3.2%

3.8%3.9%

6.9%

6.3%

3.9%

7.2%

0.0%0.0%4.3% 10.0% 4.6% 4.2%

3.4% 2.1% 3.8%4.8% 7.5% 9.7%

0.0%6.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

Undecided

Scale back


Strengthen/expand

(FY)

16

(1) Future Business Expansions: Stances Toward Strengthening/Expanding Business by Industry

３

◼Trends differ depending on the industry

• This year, “maintain present level” increased and

“strengthen/expand” decreased in all industries.

• As for the 4 major industries, general machinery

and electrical equipment & electronics have a

relatively strong stance of strengthening and

expanding, and the degree of decline were small.

On the other hand, the status quo attitude have

increased significantly in automobiles, precision

machinery, and chemicals. Especially in

automobiles, it seems that “scale back/withdraw"

is slightly higher than in other industries.

• One automobile company said "Orders from

business partners have decreased due to COVID-

19. The factory was being expanded before the

pandemic, but the construction was suspended

too."

◼ “Maintain present level” is increasing in consumer goods industry (food and textiles) and precision machinery

• Unlike the overseas business, there were no difference in the prospects for mid-term domestic business expansion among the 4 major industries.

• On the other hand, In the consumer goods industries such as food and textiles, the rate of maintaining increased. It is estimated that decline in demand due to COVID-19 is the main reason of this result.

• As for precision machinery, “ Maintain present level ” increased significantly (27.6%→46.9%).According to some interviews, "capital investment is decreasing due to the recession, and it is difficult to strengthen or expand."


Chart 3-6. Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas Business Expansions

Chart 3-7. Prospects for Mid-Term Domestic Business Expansion

Note: Please see the appendix for detailed data.

(562)(509) (22)(22) (23)(19) (85)(71) (59)(47) (79)(62) (104)(100) (28)(32)

All industries Food Textiles ChemicalsGeneral

Machinery

Electrical

Equipment &

Electronics

AutomobilesPrecision

Machinery

71.4%

59.3%

81.8%

77.3% 73.9%

42.1%

74.1%

60.6%

86.4%

74.5%68.4%

64.5%64.4%

46.0%

82.1%

59.4%

26.7%

37.9%

18.2%

22.7% 26.1%

57.9%

23.5%

38.0%

13.6%

23.4% 31.6%

33.9% 33.7%

50.0%

17.9%

40.6%

2.0% 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 1.4% 0.0% 2.1% 0.0% 1.6% 1.9% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

Scale back/withdraw


Strengthen/expand

(FY)

271 245 246 130 118 112 296 297 278 161 147 134 105 102 104 83 80 71 55 56 47 16 16 11

39.4%

22.3%

39.9%

59.0%

38.5% 40.8%38.3% 36.4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20(FY)

Scale back/withdraw


Strengthen/expand

(companies)

NIEs3 ASEAN5China North America

LatinAmerica

EU14/UKOther Asian Countries

Central & EasternEurope

42.7%

24.7%

40.4%

54.0%48.1%

32.8%

41.5%37.3% 37.8%

35.3%

27.3%

40.0%

53.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20 18 19 20(FY)

Scale back/withdraw


Strengthen/expand

1,102

1,122566 541 489 952 60 53 4376 65 5575 65 5557 43 3496 93 67244 244 207338 322 256372 355 314680 640 550 75 62 45(companies)941

1,011 839

EU14/UKNIEs3 ASEAN5China North America

LatinAmerica

Rest of Europe & CIS

AfricaMiddle EastOther Asian Countries

Central & EasternEurope

RussiaTurkey

17

(1) Future Business Expansions: Stance Regarding Strengthening/Expanding Business, by Countries/Regions (1)

３

◼ Differences in levels by region

• The percentage of “strengthen/expand" is decreasing in

all regions, especially in Latin America, Russia, and

Middle East. In these regions, “scale back/withdraw" are

also conspicuous. On the other hand, the rate of decline

in China, ASEAN5, other Asian countries and North

America is limited and remains at a certain level.

◼ SMEs are weak for China and North America

• As for SMEs, unlike the overall trend, the stance of

strengthening and expanding in China and North America

is weakening. Also, in EU14/UK, it has fallen sharply by

20.6% (58.9%→38.3%) from last year.

• On the other hand, Interest in other Asian countries

continued to be high, which "Strengthen/Expand" attitude

was 59.0%.


Chart 3-8. Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas Business Expansion (by Region)

Reference: Trends by Region (SMEs)

Note: The numbers on the graph are the numbers of responding companies in each country/region.

192 155 345 303 253 230 175 140 137 124 207 188 195 168

25.531.6

57.1

42.246.2

40.0 41.7 40.0

54.048.4

60.9 60.6

68.2

58.3

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

Strengthen/expand Maintain present level Scale back/withdraw

(companies)

(FY)

IndiaVietnamThailandSingapore Indonesia Malaysia Philippines

18

(1) Future Business Expansions: Stance Regarding Strengthening/Expanding Business, by Countries/Regions (2)

３

◼ Vietnam impressed with strong domestic and foreign demand

• In Asia, the stance of strengthening and expanding has decreased in almost all

countries. Especially in Thailand and India, where there are many indications of

economic slowdown, the decline from the previous year was large.

• As for Vietnam, 60.6% of the respondents answered “strengthen/expand”, which

was highest rate in ASEAN. By ways, bolstering existing plants was the most

popular measure to strengthen the business. In Vietnam, exports are increasing,

and domestic demand is also expanding due to recent economic growth. With

strong domestic and foreign demand, it seems that a wide range of industries

are expecting Vietnam.

• On the other hand, in India, “strengthen/expand” attitude has declined, and the

number of companies aiming to establish new plants has decreased, especially

in terms of production. A slump in demand was caused by the general decline in

consumption due to the recession, flood damage in major states (Maharashtra

and Uttar Pradesh), and difficulty in getting a car loan due to the credit instability

in the financial sector. Therefore, it seems that Japanese companies’ willingness

to invest is weakening.


Chart 3-9. Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas

Business Expansion (ASEAN5/Vietnam/India) Chart 3-10. (Production) Strengthening/Expanding Ways

Chart 3-11. (Sales) Strengthening/Expanding Ways

- - 2.9 1.7 3.6 3.0 1.7 1.4 5.1 4.07.2 5.3

12.8

6.06.8 7.7

35.4

24.8 20.918.3 17.7 18.6

19.016.9

24.2 26.6

29.7

32.1

- -

1.7

1.00.8

-- -

1.5

-

2.4 2.1

3.1

3.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

(%)

Outsource to others

Bolster existing plant(s)

Establish new plant(s)

(FY)


- 1.3 1.2 2.0 2.4 2.6 1.1 2.9 3.6 4.0 6.3 7.4 8.24.2

9.911.0

18.814.5 12.3

8.7 11.412.9

16.8 17.7 15.016.5

20.5

17.36.3

11.6

12.8

8.9 10.713.5 12.6

12.1

15.3

18.514.5

19.1

17.4

13.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

(%)

More use of agencies

Bolster existing bases

Start new sales bases

(FY)


355 314 178 145 104 82 244 207 93 67 62 45 65 55 65 55 53 43

52.148.1

41.6

33.8

40.4

30.5

52.5

41.539.8 37.3

32.337.8 36.9

27.3

50.8

40.0

52.8 53.5

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20


(companies)

(FY)

RussiaNorth America

Mexico Brazil Central & Eastern Europe

Middle East AfricaEU14/UK Turkey

19

(1) Future Business Expansions: Stance Regarding Strengthening/Expanding Business by Countries/Regions (3)

３


◼ The USMCA has widened the gap between North America and

Mexico

• In North America, the percentage of “strengthen/expand” decreased by 4.0%

from the previous year, showing a relatively small decrease. By ways, it seems

that there are solid strengthening and expansion policies in both production and

sales. In addition, it is notable that “establish new plants” is increasing in Central

and Eastern Europe.

• On the other hand, in Mexico, Brazil, EU14/UK and Russia, “strengthen/

expand” attitude decreased. Especially in Brazil, in addition to a decrease of 10.1

points, “scale back/withdraw” also increased by 7.2 points (3.8%→11.0%).

• Mexico felt slightly, while North America was relatively strong. It seems that the

USMCA has an influence on this background. One automobile company said

"Because the rules of origins are strict and tariffs put pressure on profits, we will

give up production in Mexico and consider transferring to the US.”

Chart 3-12. Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas

Business Expansion (Americas, Europe, Middle East, Africa) Chart 3-13. (Production) Strengthening/Expanding Ways

Chart 3-14. (Sales) Strengthening/Expanding Ways

5.1 5.10.6 2.1 1.0 - 2.9 3.9 2.2

6.03.2 2.2 1.5 - 3.1 1.8

5.77.0

23.722.0 25.8

20.7

10.612.2

14.811.1

10.8

9.09.7

8.9

3.1 5.5

9.27.3

9.4 7.0

0.8

2.2 -

0.7

1.92.4

1.6

--

--

2.2

--

-

-

--

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

(%)

Outsource to others



RussiaNorth America


MiddleEast

AfricaEU14/UK Turkey

3.1 3.5 1.7 1.4 1.0 1.2 3.3 2.4 1.1 1.5 3.2 4.4 - -4.6

1.8 1.9 2.3

20.8 17.8

6.7 6.911.5

4.9

18.015.9

8.6 9.03.2

8.9

4.6 5.5

10.8

9.1 7.5 7.0

14.4

13.7

6.7 7.6

13.5

14.6

16.8

15.9

10.8

16.4

6.5

17.8

20.018.2

32.3

21.8

32.130.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

(%)




RussiaNorth America


MiddleEast

AfricaEU14/UK Turkey

Chart 3-15. Overseas Business Under Third Party Alliance

20

(2) Future Business Expansions: Third Party Alliance３

◼ Japanese companies are cooperating with Chinese companies in Asia to reduce costs, and are promoting market development in China with Western companies

• When we asked companies about the overseas business under the third party alliance, 30% of the respondents answered “in cooperation”. Since the answer “for future” was only 4%, it seems that there is a clear distinction between companies that choose the third party alliance and those do not.

• Looking at the details of the alliance, Western company (104 companies) was the most popular partner, followed by Chinese company (58 companies) and Indian company (20 companies). As for the countries that carry out projects in cooperation, Thailand (27 companies) was most popular, followed by China (24 companies) and Indonesia (20 companies). As for “others (47 companies)" by country, Taiwan was mentioned through the interview.

• In the matrix analysis between the partner company and the project implementing country, the Chinese company cooperates in a wide range of Asian countries, e.g. Thailand (12 companies), Philippines (7 companies), India (7 companies), Indonesia (6 companies), and the Mekong region. On the other hand, in cooperation with Western companies, China (21 companies) stands out, far exceeding Thailand and India (10 companies). In Africa, there was one company in collaboration with Indian company (petroleum and rubber) and one with Western company (chemicals).

• There were various ways of cooperation e.g. "Receiving licenses from the western company and developing the Chinese market together." (Cooperation with Western company in China, Nonferrous metals) “Producing parts in India and selling them to Chinese automobile companies" (cooperation with Chinese company in India, Automobile parts). As an overall trend, cooperation with Chinese companies is cost-oriented, and many companies cooperate to procure/purchase some parts. Cooperation with Western companies is market-oriented, producing products with licenses from Western companies and develop the market together.

Chart 3-16. Partner Company and Project Implementing Country


Note: “Overseas business under the third party alliance" is defined that there is some form of business cooperation with foreign companies, such as procuring and delivering parts, establishing a joint venture, or joint research.

(# companies: 505(denominator))

Chinese company Indian Company Western company Subtotal

China 3 21 24

Singapore 5 2 9 16

Thailand 12 5 10 27

Indonesia 6 5 9 20

Malasia 2 1 4 7

Philippines 7 1 3 11

Vietnam 6 0 3 9

Cambodia 1 0 0 1

Laos 1 0 0 1

Myammar 0 0 0 0

India 7 10 17

Africa 0 1 1 2

Others 11 2 34 47

Subtotal 58 20 104

Company

Cou

ntr

y

In cooperation

150, 30%

For future

22, 4%

Not in cooperation

333, 66%

(# answers=182)

◼ Correspondence to COVID-19 decided the outcome of

the ranking of China and India

• India returned to the top for the first time in three years last year, but this

year China has regained the lead by a narrow margin (5 votes).

According to the interviews, comparison of China and India’s

correspondence to COVID-19 was pointed out; China resumed

economic activities early in the pandemic, however India's recession is

worsening due to prolonged lockdown.

◼ Vietnam widens gap with Thailand, US and Indonesia

are competing

• Vietnam (No.3) maintained the vote rate and slightly widened the gap

with Thailand (No.4). Vietnam has gained support from a wide range of

industries, and in particular, its popularity from general machinery is

rapidly increasing (cf. p26). In addition, the US and Indonesia are

competing by 2 votes, 0.5 points difference in the percentage.

◼ Attention is focused on Germany, Bangladesh, UAE

• Since below 10th place are few votes, the ranking is easy to change. In

this year, Germany (20 votes, 14th→11th), Bangladesh (16 votes,

21st→13th), UAE ( 6 votes, 39th→21st) moved up significantly.

Companies said that "Inquiries about Bangladesh have increased rapidly

in recent years" (automobile parts)” "Recently, the business performance

in the UAE and neighboring countries have improved" (petroleum and

rubber).

21

(3) Promising Countries: Potential Countries/Regions

in the Mid-Term - Ranking３


Please provide us with the names of up to 5 countries that you consider to have promising prospects for business operations over the mid-term (next

3 years). (Multiple answers allowed)

Question

*Percentage of votes (%) =Number of votes for country / Number of respondent companies

Chart 3-17. Promising Countries for Overseas

Business over the Mid-term (Next 3 Years)

Note 1: Countries with the same rank were ordered based upon their rank in the previous survey.

Note 2: See the appendix for results prior to FY2019.

2020 2019

(Total) 356 404

1 － 2 China 168 180 47.2 44.6

2 1 India 163 193 45.8 47.8

3 － 3 Vietnam 131 147 36.8 36.4

4 － 4 Thailand 111 133 31.2 32.9

5 － 6 US 98 93 27.5 23.0

6 － 5 Indonesia 96 102 27.0 25.2

7 － 7 Philippines 37 48 10.4 11.9

8 9 Malaysia 34 41 9.6 10.1

9 8 Mexico 32 47 9.0 11.6

10 9 Myanmar 25 41 7.0 10.1

11 － 14 Germany 20 14 5.6 3.5

12 11 Taiwan 18 18 5.1 4.5

13 21 Bangladesh 16 7 4.5 1.7

14 － 15 Australia 14 13 3.9 3.2

15 12 Korea 12 15 3.4 3.7

16 12 Singapore 11 15 3.1 3.7

16 17 Brazil 11 11 3.1 2.7

18 26 UK 9 4 2.5 1.0

19 18 Russia 8 9 2.2 2.2

20 － 20 Turkey 7 8 2.0 2.0

Ranking

Countries

No. of

Companies

Percentage

Share(%)

2020 ← 2019 2020 2019

Ranking No. of

Companies Countries

21 6 Netherlands, UAE

23 5 Cambodia, Italy, France

26 4 Hungary, Poland

28 3Japan, Laos, Saudi Arabia, Kenya, South Africa,

Czech, Canada

35 2 New Zealand, Swiss, Spain, Chile

39 1Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Hong Kong, Mongolia,

Israel,Egypt, Portugal

22

(3) Promising Countries: Potential Countries/Regions in the Mid-Term - Trends in Votes

３

◼ The ranking is becoming more bipolarized

• In this year's survey, there was a difference of 17 points in the

vote rate between Indonesia (6th) and the Philippines (7th), and it

became clear that bipolarization is progressing even in the top 10.

• Among the high-ranking teams, China and India with huge

market, Thailand with a well-established production base,

Vietnam, etc. are firmly popular. One company is “considering

transferring from Thailand to Vietnam as customers expansion"

(electrical equipment & electronics). On the other hand, the

lower-ranking team is divided into countries that have boomed in

the past, such as Russia, Mexico, and Brazil, and inconspicuous

but persistently popular countries such as Philippines, Myanmar,

and Malaysia.

• The future focus will be on whether the US and Indonesia will

remain in the high-ranking teams, and whether any country will

break out of the 7th or lower group.

◼ The automobile industry has a big influence on

trends

• In recent years, the number of respondents to this question has

been declining. However, the popularity of China and India has

remained firm. By industry, automobile is driving the percentage

of the two countries (see next page).

• In contrast, Mexico, which had high expectations from the

automobile industry, peaked in 2016 and has continued to decline.

It seems that evaluation of each country in the automobile

industry influences the ranking of promising countries.

Footnotes from page 24 onwards

Note1: “Number of responding companies” here indicates the number of companies

that answered the“ reasons” and “issues” among the companies that answered for the

question for Figure 3-17.

Note2: “Ratio” is the number of companies that chose each choice divided by the

number of companies that responded to the question itself.


Chart 3-18. Trends in Votes (1992 - 2020)

0

20

40

60

80

100

92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(%)

(FY)

China

India

Vietnam

Thailand

US

Indonesia

Philippines

Malaysia

Mexico

Myanmar

Brazil

Russia

BR

ICs R

ep

ort

Bu

rstin

g o

f the IT

Bu

bb

le

SA

RS

ou

tbre

ak

“T

he 2

008 fin

an

cia

l cris

is”

Ch

ina's

en

try in

to th

e W

TO

9/1

1 a

ttacks

An

ti-Jap

an

ese p

rote

sts

in C

hin

a

Asia

n c

urre

ncy c

risis

So

uth

ern

tou

r lectu

re

Tro

ub

le w

ith n

eig

hb

orin

gco

un

tries

Sta

rt of T

rum

p a

dm

inis

tratio

n

ＵＳ

-Ch

ina tra

de w

ar, B

rexit

CO

VID

-19 o

utb

reak

23

(3) Promising Countries: Potential Countries/Regions in the Mid-Term - Trends in Votes (4 Major Industries)

３

Chart 3-19. Trends in Votes (4 Major Industries)

Chart 3-20. Promising Countries for Overseas Business over the Mid-term (Next 3 Years) (4 Major Industries)

Automobiles Electrical Equipment & Electronics

GeneralMachinery

Chemicals


Automobiles Electrical Equipment & Electronics

GeneralMachinery

Chemicals

60.0 60.0

32.9 32.9 27.1 24.3 22.9

0

20

40

60

80

100

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(%)

(FY)

India China Thailand

US Mexico Indonesia

Vietnam

41.7 41.7

35.4 31.3

22.9 22.9

16.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(%)

(FY)

China Vietnam India

Thailand Philippines Indonesia

US

51.9 50.0

38.5 34.6

28.8 26.9

7.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(%)

(FY)

India China Vietnam

US Thailand Indonesia

Mexico

53.8 53.8

46.2 43.6

38.5

23.1

10.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(%)

(FY)

India Vietnam Thailand

China Indonesia US

Philippines

FY2020 FY2019 FY2020 FY2019 FY2020 FY2019 FY2020 FY2019

(Total 70) (Total 77) (Total 48) (Total 55) (Total 52) (Total 64) (Total 39) (Total 46)

1 India 42 46 1 China 20 26 1 India 27 35 1 India 21 24

1 China 42 40 1 Vietnam 20 25 2 China 26 34 1 Vietnam 21 14

3 Thailand 23 19 3 India 17 26 3 Vietnam 20 28 3 Thailand 18 21

3 US 23 18 4 Thailand 15 13 4 US 18 19 4 China 17 18

5 Mexico 19 17 5 Philippines 11 15 5 Thailand 15 23 5 Indonesia 15 15

6 Indonesia 17 22 5 Indonesia 11 14 6 Indonesia 14 12 6 US 9 11

7 Vietnam 16 20 7 US 8 8 7 Malaysia 6 8 7 Malaysia 6 5

8 Philippines 5 9 8 Myanmar 6 8 7 Korea 6 6 8 Philippines 4 8

8 Malaysia 5 4 9 Malaysia 3 7 7 Taiwan 6 4 8 Myanmar 4 5

10 Brazil 3 0 9 Mexico 3 6 10 Mexico 4 5 8 Taiwan 4 4

10 Germany 3 0 9 Bangladesh 3 2

9 Brazil 3 2

Rank Rank Country Rank CountryCountry Rank Country

Note: Aggregated in countries with industry-specific data for the past 10 years.

Automobiles25.0%

Chemicals15.5%


11.9%

General Machinery

10.1%

Other37.5%

168companies

24

３ (4) Promising Countries/Regions over the Mid-Term: Promising Reasons and Issues (Top 10 countries)

◼ Got back on top, Expectations for a huge market

• This year, China has returned to the top, mainly due to the current scale of the

local market and expectations for future growth. FDI has also increased

significantly, indicating its popularity. Another feature is that there is no “base of

export to third countries" at the top of the promising reasons. The importance of

the domestic market is emphasized.

• In terms of issues, a high proportion of companies think "rising labor costs" as a

top issue. In addition, although the percentage of “insufficient protection for

intellectual property rights” is declining, it is still at a high level of 37.2%.

Percentage Share：47.2% (last year＋2.6pt)

Highest：93.1% (2003)

Lowest：37.5% (2013)


No.1 China （↑）

Promising reasons

Issues

Percentage Share and Outward FDI of Japan

Breakdown by Industry

66.5%

58.1%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(336)

2008(294)

2009(348)

2010(394)

2011(351)

2012(312)

2013(183)

2014(214)

2015(162)

2016(197)

2017(197)

2018(221)

2019(176)

2020(167)

Current size of local market

Future growth potential oflocal market

Concentration of industry

Supply base for assemblers

Inexpensivecomponents/raw materials

(FY)(No. of companies)

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yenChina

FDI FDI (Manufacturing) FDI (Non-Manufacturing)

Promising Country Percentage Share (right axis)

68.6%

62.8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(325)

2008(285)

2009(336)

2010(377)

2011(339)

2012(300)

2013(179)

2014(199)

2015(159)

2016(187)

2017(190)

2018(211)

2019(155)

2020(156)

Intense competition withother companies

Rising labor costs

Execution of legal systemunclear

Insuffiicient protection forintellectual property rights

Restrictions on foreigncurrency/ transfers of moneyoverseas(FY)

(No. of companies)

Automobiles25.8%

Chemicals16.6%


10.4%

General Machinery

12.9%

Other34.4%

163companies

25

３

◼ Close second, strong expectations for market growth

• The most promising reason was "future growth potential of the local market"

(76.3%), but in recent years, it has been accompanied by investment

performance, and the popularity is becoming more real.

• In terms of issues, “underdeveloped infrastructure” maintained a high level,

and concerns about security and social conditions are rising. India has

suffering from a recession in recent years, and this year, recorded significant

negative growth due to the prolonged lockdown. It is worth noting whether the

market can maintain the market growth in the future.

No.2 India （↓）

Percentage Share：45.8% (last year-2.0pt)

Highest：60.5% (2010)

Lowest：5.7% (1992)


Issues


Promising reasons

76.3%

35.6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(246)

2008(269)

2009(275)

2010(310)

2011(283)

2012(279)

2013(208)

2014(220)

2015(171)

2016(223)

2017(193)

2018(197)

2019(187)

2020(160)



Inexpensive source oflabor

Supply base forassemblers

Qualified human resources


41.8%

36.6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(207)

2008(257)

2009(260)

2010(294)

2011(255)

2012(255)

2013(194)

2014(188)

2015(162)

2016(212)

2017(182)

2018(174)

2019(161)

2020(134)


Underdevelopedinfrastructure


Security/social instability

Complicated tax system


-20

0

20

40

60

80

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yen

India




(4) Promising Countries/Regions over the Mid-Term: Promising Reasons and Issues (Top 10 countries)

Automobiles12.2%

Chemicals15.3%


15.3%General Machinery

16.0%

Other41.2%

131companies

26

３

No.3 Vietnam（→）◼ Concentrated widespread support and became the leading

country in ASEAN

• Although the ranking is the same as last year, the vote rate has increased

slightly. It gained well-balanced support from a wide range of industries.

Companies expecting local market growth potential remained at a high level,

and the number of companies that expecting "current scale" increased slightly.

• It seems that Vietnam is becoming more popular in recent years due to the

US-China conflict and the trend of supply chain restructuring. However, as the

FDI is steadily increasing, it turns out that it is popular with substance


Highest：38.1% (2017)

Lowest：9.4% (2000)


Issues


Promising reasons

59.5%

42.7%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(176)

2008(150)

2009(149)

2010(165)

2011(149)

2012(160)

2013(146)

2014(151)

2015(116)

2016(154)

2017(163)

2018(144)

2019(143)

2020(131)


Inexpensive source of labor



Base of export to thirdcountries


35.8%

32.1%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(142)

2008(144)

2009(136)

2010(156)

2011(121)

2012(129)

2013(132)

2014(127)

2015(110)

2016(132)

2017(141)

2018(127)

2019(113)

2020(109)



Rising labor costs

Difficult to securemanagement-level staff

Underdeveloped legalsystem


-10

10

30

50

-500

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yen

Vietnam





Automobiles20.7%

Chemicals13.5%


13.5%

General Machinery

16.2%

Other36.0%

111companies

27

３

No.4 Thailand（→）◼ Leading country in ASEAN along with Vietnam

• Thailand was 4th place following last year. One of the similarities with Vietnam

is that “base of export to third countries" is a promising reason in addition to the

"local market”. While Vietnam is popular by “inexpensive source of labor”,

Thailand is popular by ”concentration of industry”.

• As for the issues, “securing management-level staff” and “rising labor costs” are

common to both countries. In addition, “Securing technical/engineering staff” is

a major issue in Thailand, indicating that expectations for the country's industrial

base are high.


Highest：38.5% (2013)

Lowest：20.9% (1992)


Issues


Promising reasons

42.3%

38.7%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(130)

2008(124)

2009(108)

2010(132)

2011(159)

2012(160)

2013(185)

2014(173)

2015(128)

2016(138)

2017(152)

2018(155)

2019(131)

2020(111)







61.4%

38.6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(112)

2008(117)

2009(104)

2010(128)

2011(133)

2012(137)

2013(157)

2014(142)

2015(118)

2016(121)

2017(122)

2018(134)

2019(104)

2020(88)


Rising labor costs


Difficult to securetechnical/engineering staff



-20

0

20

40

60

-4,000

-2,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yen

Thailand





28

３

◼ Maintaining firm popularity with profitability in huge markets

• Raised one place from last year and ranked in 5th place. It has gained support

from a wide range of industries, especially automobiles and chemicals.

According to the chart of FDI, non-manufacturing investment is more than

manufacturing investment, so the percentage of votes is stagnant.

• Expectations for the huge local market are still strong. In particular, "profitability

of the local market", is a great feature which China and India do not have. On

the flip side, “intense competition with other companies” stands out at 70.5% in

terms of issues.


Highest：41.5% (1998)

Lowest: 9.9% (2011)

No.5 US（↑）


Issues


Company Breakdown (by Industry)

Promising reasons

75.0%

46.9%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(89)

2008(76)

2009(64)

2010(58)

2011(47)

2012(53)

2013(54)

2014 (66)

2015(70)

2016(91)

2017(109)

2018(119)

2019(92)

2020(96)



Developed localinfrastructure

Profitability of local market



70.5%

30.8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(78)

2008(72)

2009(60)

2010(52)

2011(41)

2012(41)

2013(40)

2014(47)

2015(62)

2016(63)

2017(87)

2018(101)

2019(67)

2020(78)


Rising labor costs



Increased taxation


Automobiles23.5%

Chemicals18.4%


8.2%

General Machinery

9.2%

Other40.8%

98companies

-20

0

20

40

60

-20,000

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yen

US




29

３


Highest：45.7% (2014)

Lowest：8.1% (2006)

◼ Falling to 6th place while competing with the US, Vote rate

was improved

• Although it fell to 6th place due to the decline in expectations for the current size

of the local market, the vote rate improved slightly to +1.8%. “Base of export to

third countries" and “base for product development" are selected as promising

reason. On the other hand, "concentration of industry" is not selected, which is

the difference from Thailand.

• One general machinery company, which think Indonesia as promising, said

“There are still many Japanese business partners in Indonesia and the industrial

base is firm. It is attractive that relocation within Indonesia can be relatively

flexible." It seems that the issue is how far Japanese companies can be retained.

No.6 Indonesia（↓）


Issues



Promising reasons

Automobiles17.7%

Chemicals14.6%


11.5%General

Machinery15.6%

Other40.6%

96companies

-10

10

30

50

-2,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yen

Indonesia



40.3%

37.5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(41)

2008(41)

2009(48)

2010(98)

2011(119)

2012(171)

2013(194)

2014(188)

2015(154)

2016(152)

2017(126)

2018(115)

2019(82)

2020(72)

Rising labor costs

Intense competition with othercompanies






69.6%

34.8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(45)

2008(41)

2009(50)

2010(105)

2011(141)

2012(208)

2013(215)

2014(220)

2015(163)

2016(164)

2017(142)

2018(127)

2019(99)

2020(92)







30

３

◼ Improving prejudice is the urgent issue

• Expectations for “inexpensive labor" are particularly high in ASEAN, so it

remains in 7th place. Looking at other promising reasons, the number of "good

for risk diversification to other countries" increased.

• Expectations for market growth have been declining since peaking in 2016,

and concerns about security and social conditions have increased since the

same period. On the other hand, the actual amount of FDI has been steadily

increasing, and there are high evaluation of qualified human resources.

Therefore, it seems that improving concern for the security issues (which is

not necessarily true) is urgent.

No.7 Philippines（→）


Highest：15.4% (1995)

Lowest：1.5% (2008)


Issues



Promising reasons

54.3%

45.7%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(14)

2008(7)

2009(14)

2010(14)

2011(13)

2012(21)

2013(36)

2014(49)

2015(48)

2016(48)

2017(45)

2018(42)

2019(46)

2020(35)




Good for risk diversificationto other countries




Automobiles13.5%

Chemicals5.4%



10.8%

Other40.5%

37companies

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

-500

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yen

Philippines



46.7%

33.3%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(12)

2008(7)

2009(13)

2010(13)

2011(10)

2012(13)

2013(29)

2014(36)

2015(44)

2016(42)

2017(41)

2018(39)

2019(34)

2020(30)



Rising labor costs





31

３

◼ The key is to set out the characteristics of promising reasons

• It rose to 8th place by collecting votes from automobiles, chemicals, and general

machinery. However, both number and percentage of votes decreased from last

year. As for the promising reasons, although “future growth potential of the local

market" is taking a downturn, many companies expect “concentration of

industry" and "risk diversification to other countries”.

• In terms of issues, few companies answered “underdeveloped infrastructure”

and “execution of legal system unclear”, and lots of companies pointed out that

securing “management-level staff” and “technical/engineering staff” is difficult. In

addition, the underdevelopment of local supporting industries is also regarded

as an issue.


Highest：23.9% (1994)

Lowest：4.1% (2007)

No.8 Malaysia（↑）


Issues



Promising reasons

41.2%

26.5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(21)

2008(20)

2009(26)

2010(28)

2011(34)

2012(35)

2013(36)

2014(46)

2015(27)

2016(31)

2017(25)

2018(34)

2019(40)

2020(34)



Developed localinfrastructure




40.0%

40.0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(21)

2008(18)

2009(24)

2010(25)

2011(25)

2012(21)

2013(27)

2014(35)

2015(22)

2016(26)

2017(22)

2018(31)

2019(28)

2020(20)




Rising labor costs

Underdeveloped localsupporting industries


Automobiles14.7%

Chemicals17.6%



17.6%

Other41.2% 34

companies

-10

0

10

20

30

40

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yen

Malaysia




32

３

◼ Automobile industry leads the popularity• Mexico had a 25.9% vote rate at its peak, but it has dropped year by year and is

ranked 9th this year. Looking at the promising reasons, the proportion of " future growth potential of local market " has decreased significantly, and at the same time, " supply base for assemblers " have risen. In fact, Mexico is beginning to be seen as production bases rather than market. This is the inequality factor with leading countries such as China and India.

• In terms of issues, "difficult to secure management-level staff," "intense competition with other companies," and "underdeveloped local supporting industries“ were pointed out. It is a risk that the majority of companies that answered Mexico is promising are in the automobile industry, so diversification of the industries is important in addition to the market expansion.

No.9 Mexico（↓）


Highest：25.9% (2016)

Lowest：2.0% (2003, 2004)


Issues



Promising reasonsAutomobiles59.4%

Chemicals12.5%


9.4%

General Machinery

6.3%Other12.5%

32companies

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

-4,000

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yenMexico



64.5%

45.2%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(20)

2008(21)

2009(20)

2010(25)

2011(29)

2012(70)

2013(81)

2014 (99)

2015(99)

2016(122)

2017(81)

2018(58)

2019(46)

2020(31)

Supply base forassemblers






56.0%

56.0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2007(19)

2008(21)

2009(19)

2010(23)

2011(23)

2012(59)

2013(70)

2014(84)

2015(90)

2016(115)

2017(72)

2018(52)

2019(38)

2020(25)





Rising labor costs




33

３

◼ Inexpensive labor force is the comparative advantage

• Expectations for “inexpensive source of labor” were highest among the top 10

countries. With rising labor costs in China and other ASEAN countries,

Myanmar is becoming more attractive as an export base to third countries,

leveraging its cost competitiveness.

• In terms of issues, many respondents answered, “underdeveloped

infrastructure" and "underdeveloped legal system“. In addition, anxiety about

security and social conditions were also mentioned. Moreover, this country’s

FDI is mostly for the non-manufacturing. Notably, Myanmar is a rare case that

non-manufacturing investment is higher than manufacturing.


Highest：13.1% (2013)

Lowest：1.0% (2010)

No.10 Myanmar（↓）


Issues



Promising reasons

64.0%

52.0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2011(7)

2012(48)

2013(60)

2014 (53)

2015(34)

2016(49)

2017(39)

2018(36)

2019(40)

2020(25)





Stable policies to attractforeign investment


68.4%

52.6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2011(5)

2012(43)

2013(56)

2014(50)

2015(33)

2016(47)

2017(38)

2018(33)

2019(30)

2020(19)


Underdeveloped legalsystem


Lack of information on thecountry



Automobiles8.0%

Chemicals8.0%


24.0%

General Machinery

16.0%

Other44.0%

25companies

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

20

18

%Billion yenMyanmar




0

20

40

60

80

100

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

(%)

(FY)

India

China

Vietnam

US

Indonesia

Thailand

Mexico

Myanmar

Philippines

Brazil

34

(5) Promising Countries/Regions: Long-Term Prospects３

◼ India stays at a top as a promising country in the long term

• As for the long-term promising countries for the next 10 years, India has ranked first 10 years in a row. China remained in second place, and its

percentage share increased by 3.7%. On the other hand, Vietnam decreased its vote rate. Although the mid-term promise is high, it seems that the

evaluation of companies is divided in the long-term.

◼ US rises to 4th place with increased share

• Although there has been no significant change in rankings for the past few years, there was a change in rankings below 4th place this year. The factor

was the US, which greatly increased the vote rate to 4th place (+6.8 points compared to last year). Regarding this point, there was an opinion that

“Although there is anxiety in the near future due to the uncertainty of the Trump administration and the influence of COVID-19, the huge market cannot

be ignored in the long run" (nonferrous metal).


Chart 3-21. Promising Countries/Regions in the Long-Term (Next 10 Years)

1. Results for FY2020 2. Trends in votes

2020 2019

(Total) 264 296

1 － 1 India 140 155 53.0 52.4

2 － 2 China 116 119 43.9 40.2

3 － 3 Vietnam 82 103 31.1 34.8

4 － 6 US 73 62 27.7 20.9

5 － 4 Indonesia 71 84 26.9 28.4

6 － 5 Thailand 61 73 23.1 24.7

7 － 8 Mexico 30 35 11.4 11.8

8 － 7 Myanmar 26 39 9.8 13.2

9 － 8 Philippines 25 35 9.5 11.8

10 － 11 Brazil 22 24 8.3 8.1

RankingNo. of

Companies

Percentage

Share(%)

2020 ← 2019 2020 2019

Country/Region


4. Special Theme #1 – Impact of COVID-19 on Supply Chain

283

264

178

146

73

50

3021

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

China ASEAN Japan NorthAmerica

Europe LatinAmerica

NIEs3 NoImpact

1 2

33

167

236

338

313

193

96

67

4133

22

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Nov-19 Dec-19 Jan-20 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct~ No

Impact

36

(1) Impact of COVID-19 on Supply Chain４

Chart 4-1. The Most Impacted Month Chart 4-2. The Most Impacted Country/Region

◼ The most serious period of COVID-19 on the supply chain is over

• In order to measure how COVID-19 affected Japan's production activities (supply chain), we asked questions (1) the most impacted month and (2)the most

impacted country/region. As a result, the supply chain of Japanese companies was most impacted from April to May, and it can be seen that the impact has

almost disappeared recently.

◼ The impact on production network of China and ASEAN was greater, implying the significance of this region

• Regarding the impacted country/region, China (283 companies) was most impacted, followed by ASEAN (264 companies). It shows that COVID-19 has

almost the same impact on the production networks of China and ASEAN. Comparing the number of responding companies, the number of respondents far

exceeds that of Japan (178 companies) and North America (146 companies), which suggests the importance of the production network of China and

ASEAN. According to the interviews, as for China, "the spread of infection and lockdown had a greater impact earlier than in other countries" (chemicals),

and as for ASEAN, "in Thailand, inventory adjustments are required due to the suspension of operations at delivery destinations. For stopping the plant in

operation, it gave a blow to business performance. ”(general machinery)

When your overseas business(production side) were most affected by COVID-19 outbreak?

Which country/region of your oversea business(production side) were most affected by COVID-19 outbreak? (Multiple answers allowed)Question

Note: For the convenience of the answer period, this question is collectively referred to as "October-" after October

(# companies: 508/ # answers: 1542)



reform of product and business allocation, 86companies

Suspension, 78companies

reform of regional allocation, 63companies

Return to domestic investment, 11companies

No change, 307companies

39

(2) Implications of COVID-19 for Investment Plan４

Reference: Impact on Foreign Investment Plan by SARS (Survey 2003)

◼ Operational response to the COVID-19 is prioritized at this stage and reshaping FDI plans is yet to be considered

• When we asked if they would change their foreign investment plans in response to the COVID-19, approximately 60% of respondents answered “no

change”. However, according to the interview, many companies said, "Immediate response to COVID-19 is prioritized, so we cannot reconsider the

investment plan right now“. Therefore, it seems that investment decisions have not been made because the situation is not calm. On the other hand, the

other 40% said they were considering some kind of response. Specifically, "reform of product and business allocation (86 companies)" was the most

common, followed by “suspension (78 companies)" and "reform of regional allocation of FDI (63 companies) “. When we asked the same question in

2003, when SARS were sweeping the world, approximately 90% answered “no change”. Compared to this result, it seems that impact of COVID-19

have had a huge impact rather than SARS.

◼ As for the “Reshoring”, few cases are observed

• As for the reshoring, only 11 companies answered that they would return to domestic investment. The breakdown of the industries is 3 automobile

companies, 2 chemicals, and 1 from 6 industries including general machinery and electrical equipment & electronics or so.

37Copyright© 2021 Japan Bank for International Cooperation All Rights Reserved.

After the COVID-19 outbreak, how will you change foreign investment plans?（Multiple answers allowed）Question


Chart 4-3. Impact on Foreign Investment Plan

Revised medium-term outlook for business operations due to the

impact of SARS10companies

Revision of medium-term outlook for business operation is a possibility in

the event of prolongation or recurrence of SARS in future, 49companies

No change, 477companies

(# companies: 536)

Note: Single answer

10

8

7

5

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

3

7

3

4

2

4

2

2

1

1

2

(17)

(11)

(11)

(7)

(5)

(4)

(4)

(3)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

-

-

(5)

0 5 10 15 20


Chemicals

Automobiles

General Machinary

Nonferrous Metals

Food

Precision Machinery

Metal Products

Textiles

Ceramics, Cement & Glass

Steel

Transportation Equipment

Paper, Pulp & Wood

Petroleum & Rubber

Other

38

(3) How to Reinforce Supply Chain ４

◼ Many of respondents are considering supply chain reinforcement, while few choice relocation

• We asked about efforts to improve the supply chain under the impact of COVID-19. It was found that many companies are considering some measures;

"expand working capital (133 companies)" was the most common, followed by “multiply factories by product (123 companies)“ , “expand investment for

automation and labor saving (122 companies) ”, “enhance local procurement and local sales (118 companies)” etc. In the interview, it was pointed out that

"strengthening inventory control and addition of inventory", "securing multiple bases in China", and "shortening the supply chain by local production for local

consumption“ are important to reinforce the supply chain.

• On the other hand, the reorganization of bases such as "return to Japan (43 companies)" and “move to third country (28 companies)" seems to be cautious at

this point. By industry, electronic equipment and electronics (17 companies) are at the top, followed by chemicals (11 companies) and automobiles (11

companies). One chemicals company said, "We are not sure what to do in the company. The future is uncertain with COVID-19 and cannot make a drastic

decision." It is expected that it will take time to review the bases.

Chart 4-4. How to Reinforce Supply Chain


(# companies: 499/ # answers: 823)(# companies: 61/ “ answers: 71)

Chart 4-5. Company Breakdown by Industry

(Return to Japan / Move to Third Country)

86

78

73

68

73

27

18

10

70

47

45

49

50

38

16

10

7

58

(133)

(123)

(122)

(118)

(111)

(43)

(28)

(17)

(128)

0 50 100 150

Expand working capital

Multiply factories by prodoct

Expand investment for automationand labor saving

Enhance local procurement and local sales

Review distribution networkincluding identification of alternatives

Return to Japan

Move to third country

Expand financial support forsupplier/procurer

None

110

118

73

45

33

24

19

73

68

58

44

23

13

17

11

56

(178)

(176)

(117)

(68)

(46)

(41)

(30)

(129)

0 50 100 150 200

Reconsider BCP

Reconsider regionalsales plan

Reconsider internalcommunication system

Enhance relationship withrelated overseas…

Drastic reconsideration ofbusiness

Expand IT investmentfor overseas bases

Enhance relationship withlocal financial institutions

None

Large enterprises

SMEs

合計

'Regarding supply chain, in which fields your company will take/has taken measures?（Multiple answers allowed）Question

20 Return to Japan

Move to third country

合計

13

31

30

39

20

23

26

42

14

12

21

23

5

10

8

13

3

7

5

8

5

5

6

9

2

4

3

11

11

12

14

16

(73)

(104)

(113)

(161)

0 50 100 150 200

GeneralMachinary

ElectricalEquipment

&Electronics

Chemicals

Automobiles110

118

73

45

33

24

19

73

68

58

44

23

13

17

11

56

(178)

(176)

(117)

(68)

(46)

(41)

(30)

(129)

0 50 100 150 200

Reconsider BCP

Reconsider regional sales plan


Enhance relationship withrelated overseas companies

Drastic reconsideration of business



None

39

(4) How to Cope with COVID-19 other than Supply Chain Reforms ４

Chart 4-7. Countermeasure (4 Major Industries)

◼ IT investment is expected toward further digitalization of supply chain network

• In this question, we asked how to cope with COVID-19 other than supply chain reforms. Many companies answered “reconsider BCP (178 companies)"

and "reconsider regional sales plan (176 companies)" as measures. Specifically, many respondents said that they would review their BCP in order to

respond to the second and third waves of COVID-19 and next pandemic.

• In addition, a certain number of respondents answered, "reconsider internal communication system (117 companies)" and “expand IT investment for

overseas bases (41 companies)". With COVID-19, it seems that companies are reaffirming the importance of IT and digitization, and investment priorities

are rising.

• As for the 4 major industries, all industries prioritize “reconsider BCP”. For automobiles, 42 companies answered "reconsider regional sales plan", but this

includes not only downward revisions due to reduced demand, but also upward revisions of plans following the recovery of the Chinese business.



Chart 4-6. How to Cope with COVID-19

other than Supply Chain Reforms(# companies: 275/ # answers: 451)

Reconsider BCP Reconsider regional sales plan


Enhance relationship withrelated overseas companies

Drastic reconsideration of business Expand IT investmentfor overseas sites


None

110

118

73

45

33

24

19

73

68

58

44

23

13

17

11

56

(178)

(176)

(117)

(68)

(46)

(41)

(30)

(129)

0 50 100 150 200

Reconsider BCP

Reconsider regionalsales plan


Enhance relationship withrelated overseas…

Drastic reconsideration ofbusiness



None

Large enterprises

SMEs

合計

Regarding other than supply chain, in which fields your company will take/has taken measures?（Multiple answers allowed）Question

58

18

36

30

150

8

4

5

6

111

10

1

1

0

28

4

0

2

0

30

(80)

(23)

(44)

(36)

(319)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Already decoupled

Under procedure

Under consideration

No need to decouple

No discussion

40

(5) US-China Decoupling４

Chart 4-8. Correspondence to US-China Decoupling Theory

◼ The US-China confrontation is catalyzing the production network relocation to more cost competitive countries and/or

to the “local production for local consumption” strategy

• When we asked companies about the correspondence to US-China decoupling, while many companies said “no discussion (319 companies)", 80

companies (58 companies have bases in China and US) answered “already decoupled”, followed by “under procedure (23 companies)” and “under

consideration (44 companies). Therefore, about 30% of the respondents, which is 40% of companies that have bases in both US and China, are

corresponding to the US-China decoupling.

• In response to rising labor costs in China, there have been some moves to relocate or change the suppliers to Southeast Asia or Mexico, which have

attractive inexpensive source. Some company pointed out that his move have been accelerated by US-China conflict. One company which has already

decoupled said, "In the past, we manufactured in China and supplied products to the US, but after Trump was inaugurated, we changed the business like ‘In

China for China’ and ‘In Mexico/US for US’"(automobile parts). In addition, some companies said “While aiming to reinforce the supply chain triggered by

the impact of COVID-19, in order to reduce distribution costs and avoid risks, we are going to change the business strategy like ‘In China for China’ and ‘In

Mexico/US for US’.”

Chart 4-9. Correspondence by 4 Major Industries


(# companies: 502)

(80)

bases in China and US

basaes only in China (no bases in US)

bases only in US (no bases in China)

No bases in China and US

全体

28.3

11.5

11.3

16.3

2.2

6.6

5.6

5.1

10.9

8.2

5.6

10.2

4.3

11.5

9.9

8.2

54.3

62.3

67.6

60.2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

General Machinary

Electrical Equipment& Electronics

Chemicals

Automobiles

Already decoupled

Under procedure

Under consideration

No need to decouple

No discussion

（％）

Due to US-China conflict or COVID-19 outbreak, the term “US-China decoupling” has become

more and more popular. Regarding this issue, which measures your company will take/has taken?

Question


5. Special Theme #2 – Prospects for SDGs

51.8%

30.9%

6.3%

14.1%

18.8%

31.9%

41.5%

31.9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Not yet implemented in business

Considering implementingin business/ in its strategy

Implemented in PR/CSR

Implemented in business/ in its strategy

42

(1) Heterogeneities in Degree of Efforts towards SDGs５

◼ Large Japanese companies adopting SDGs, SMEs lag behind.

• When asked about the status of SDGs implementation, 22% (127 companies) answered that they “implemented in business/in its strategy” and 24% (142

companies) answered that they “implemented in PR/CSR etc.”. A little less than 1/2 companies are working on SDGs.

• In addition, about 1/4 are “considering implementing in business or in its strategy”, indicating well-spread of awareness, even if they didn’t step into

concrete action yet.

• Little intersectoral variations, except less efforts in automotive sector indicating that there is a room for expansion of efforts in the future.

• Large enterprises are ahead of SMEs, especially for PR/CSR.

Chart 5-1. Degree of Efforts towards SDGs Chart 5-2. Degree of Efforts towards SDGs (by Company Size)

Please select all that apply to your SDGs commitment. (Multiple answers allowed)

(# companies: 504/ # answers: 586 (denominator))



Denominator= # companies of each category

Question

Large enterprises (313companies)

SMEs (191companies)

Implemented in business/ in its

strategy, 127companies, 22%

Implemented in PR/CSR,

142companies, 24%

Considering implementing in business/ in its strategy,

159companies, 27%

Not yet implemented in business,

158companies, 27%

59.9%

57.5%

45.3%

11.8%

17.4%

11.5%

10.5%

7.0%

53.0%

29.9%

6.7%

7.3%

28.7%

17.1%

10.4%

12.8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Increased interest from consumers,buyers and professional federations

Self motivated

Relationship management with investors

Relationship management with financial institutions

Request from procurers/suppliers

Influence from competitors

Parent company, group company

Requirement from local authority

43

(2) Motivations behind Efforts towards SDGs５

◼ As social attention rises, companies embark spontaneously onto SDG changes—through supply chains for SMEs, financing for large enterprises.

• We asked questions from various angles about the motives for working on the SDGs.

✓ Social awareness: consumer awareness are the main reported motives followed by self-motivation in all companies.

✓ Financing: pressures from investors much rather than financial institutions in large companies. “We frequently receive inquiries about SDGs from overseas investors, and we exposed to a strict looks“(chemicals).

✓ Supply chain transmission: SDGs becoming a keyword among companies within the same supply chain in SMEs. "European customers are strongly expected to work on the SDGs" (nonferrous metals).

• Regarding the fact that many respondents answered “self motivated” in this survey, there was an opinion that “It is inevitable because of our products deeply related to the environment” (electrical equipment & electronics). In addition, there was an opinion that “We were surprised by high number of ‘self motivated’” (US pension fund), which is perceived as an unexpected result for overseas investors.


Question What are the motivations of your company to implement/have implemented SDGs? (Multiple answers allowed)

Chart 5-3. Motivations behind Efforts towards SDGs (by Company Size)(# companies: 451/ # answers: 906)


Large enterprises（287companies）

SMEs（164companies）

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Automobiles Chemicals ElectricalEquipment &Electronics

GeneralMachinery

Increased interest from consumers, buyers and professional federations

Self motivated

Request from procurers/suppliers

Requirement from local authority

Relationship management with investors

Relationship management with financial institutions

Parent company, group company

Influence from competitors

44

５

◼ Sectoral discrepancies reflect different business models and SME shares.

• Responding to SDGs as a necessity to remain part of global supply chains forautomobiles and general machinery having many SMEs + material industries (such as nonferrous metals, steel, paper, pulp and wood)

• In energy-intensive industries, such as chemicals, petroleum/rubber, ceramics, cement and glass, financial incentives are recognized as major pressure towards SDGs.


Note: See the appendix for the response status of all industries.

Chart 5-4. Motivations behind Efforts towards SDGs (by Industry)


Denominator= # companies of each industry

(2) Sectoral Discrepancies in Motivations behind Efforts towards SDGs

Incre

ased in

tere

st fro

m c

onsum

ers

,

buyers

and p

rofe

ssio

nal fe

dera

tions

Self m

otiv

ate

d

Request fro

m p

rocure

rs/s

upplie

rs

Require

ment fro

m lo

cal a

uth

ority

Rela

tionship

managem

ent

with

investo

rs

Rela

tionship

managem

ent

with

financia

l institu

tions

Pare

nt c

om

pany, g

roup c

om

pany

Influ

ence fro

m c

om

petito

rs

Automobiles 48% 43% 37% 15% 19% 14% 12% 12%

Chemicals 57% 60% 22% 9% 46% 11% 14% 15%

Electrical

Equipment &

Electronics

63% 55% 16% 5% 39% 13% 7% 14%

General

Machinery63% 46% 24% 7% 32% 12% 15% 15%

Industry

type

Motivations behind efforts towards SDGs

47.1%

53.8%

35.6%

12.5%

7.7%

47.4%

25.5%

36.5%

44.5%

34.3%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Compatibility between business and SDGs

Reluctance from field side

Lack of HR

Lack of information

Reluctance from management side

45

５

◼ Initiatives towards SDGs seen as orthogonal to on-going business, face resistance from managers at inception, from the field later

• When asking about the obstacles to implement/have implemented SDGs, 50.5% (230 companies) answered “compatibility between business and SDGs", followed by “luck of understanding of field side (39.3%)”, “lack of HR (38.9%)”, and “lack of information (28.1%)”.

• No observable sectoral differences (not shown in the graph)

◼ The need for managing SDG-related changes with a top-down approach

• In order to find out the difference in how to perceive obstacles, we compared the distribution of obstacles by dividing them into companies that are advancing the SDGs and those that are not.

• Perception of incompatibility between business and SDGs (even for companies already advancing towards SDGs)

• Luck of awareness from managers at initial stages

• Luck of awareness from workers once changes are implemented

Chart 5-5. Implementation Hurdles


Question What are the obstacles of your company to implement/have implemented SDGs? (Multiple answers allowed)

(# companies: 455 (denominator)/ # answers=821)

Chart 5-6. Implementation Hurdles (by Implementation Degree)

(3) Implementation Hurdles regarding SDGs

23.5%

28.1%

38.9%

39.3%

50.5%

0% 20% 40% 60%


Lack of information

Lack of HR



47.1%

53.8%

35.6%

12.5%

7.7%

47.4%

25.5%

36.5%

44.5%

34.3%

0% 20% 40% 60%



Lack of HR

Lack of information


Implemented in business/ in its strategy（104companies）

Not yet implemented in business (137companies)


0

50

100

150

200

250

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

910

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

46

５

◼ Japanese manufacturers see opportunities in SDGs related to their products or operations and intention to take on challenging social issues in the future is observed.

• We asked what SDGs goals are you currently working on and would like to work on in the future (* This time, we distributed a reference including examples assumed for each goals based on the United Nations Global compact. See page 68&69).

• As the result, focus on goals compatible with Japanese manufacturers business model: sustainable consumption and production, clean energy and innovation (3,7,8,9,12 and13) and some intention to take on challenging social issues, such as poverty, hunger, and inequality, in the future are observed.

Chart 5-7. Goals Popular for Japanese Companies (Present/Future)


(# companies “Present”: 346, # companies “Future”: 374)

(4) Goals Popular for Japanese Companies

Present

Future

Question What are the items your company is coping with/ want to cope with in future? Please select the relevant answers.

(Multiple answers allowed)

Present Future

1: No Poverty 33 65

2:Zero Hunger 45 66

3:Good Health and Well-being 160 149

4:Quality Education 89 101

5:Gender Equality 114 120

6:Clean Water and Sanitation 93 95

7:Affordable and Clean Energy 219 198

8:Decent Work and Economic Growth 200 196

9:Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure 200 207

10:Reduce inequalities 87 82

11:Sustainable Cities and Communities 129 117

12:Responsible Consumption and Production 230 203

13:Climate Action 168 161

14:Life Below Water 83 99

15:Life on Land 82 84

16:Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions 93 92

17:Partnerships for the Goals 78 93


Appendix

Note 1: Overseas Production Ratio = Overseas Production / (Domestic Production + Overseas Production)

Note 2: Overseas Sales Ratio = Overseas Sales / (Domestic Sales + Overseas Sales)Copyright© 2021 Japan Bank for International Cooperation All Rights Reserved. 48

Basic Data: Overseas Production/Sales Ratios１

No. of Com-

panies

No. of Com-

panies

No. of Com-

panies

No. of Com-

panies

No. of Com-

panies

No. of Com-

panies

No. of Com-

panies

No. of Com-

panies

No. of Com-

panies

Food 19.7% 19 28.9% 18 18.0% 20 19.5% 20 22.5% 20 21.4% 22 30.2% 21 16.4% 22 17.7% 22

Textiles 59.8% 21 55.0% 21 57.1% 19 56.1% 19 57.9% 17 31.0% 20 30.2% 23 32.0% 20 32.0% 20

Paper, Pulp & Wood 15.0% 7 19.4% 9 19.4% 9 17.2% 9 20.0% 8 17.0% 10 19.4% 9 18.3% 9 17.2% 9

Chemicals (total) 28.2% 60 35.1% 69 30.9% 64 30.2% 63 33.4% 56 37.5% 75 37.5% 85 35.1% 74 35.6% 70

Chemicals (incl. plastic products) 29.4% 55 35.5% 66 32.1% 58 31.3% 57 35.0% 51 38.8% 69 38.1% 80 35.7% 68 36.3% 64

Pharmaceuticals 15.0% 5 28.3% 3 20.0% 6 20.0% 6 17.0% 5 23.3% 6 27.0% 5 28.3% 6 28.3% 6

Petroleum & Rubber 50.0% 8 32.3% 11 41.7% 12 42.5% 12 38.0% 10 46.0% 10 32.3% 11 40.0% 12 38.6% 11

Ceramics, Cement & Glass 32.8% 9 35.0% 7 30.7% 7 30.7% 7 33.6% 7 41.4% 11 42.5% 8 35.0% 10 36.1% 9

Steel 20.7% 14 31.2% 13 25.0% 15 20.7% 14 20.7% 14 23.0% 15 28.6% 14 24.4% 16 20.0% 14

Nonferrous Metals 34.5% 22 31.3% 24 35.0% 14 33.5% 13 35.8% 13 34.2% 24 35.8% 26 32.1% 17 32.1% 14

Metal Products 28.5% 23 40.6% 25 31.7% 24 29.8% 23 32.0% 23 32.5% 24 39.4% 27 35.8% 25 35.4% 24

General Machinery (total) 28.7% 46 33.9% 54 26.3% 45 26.6% 44 28.0% 43 42.1% 52 42.0% 57 37.4% 46 36.8% 45

Assembly 28.4% 38 34.5% 44 23.7% 39 23.9% 38 25.0% 38 42.9% 42 42.0% 47 37.0% 40 36.3% 39

Parts 30.0% 8 31.0% 10 43.3% 6 43.3% 6 51.0% 5 39.0% 10 42.0% 10 40.0% 6 40.0% 6

44.0% 72 42.5% 68 40.6% 57 40.4% 56 42.0% 54 46.8% 84 45.1% 76 43.8% 65 43.1% 62

Assembly 36.1% 28 35.0% 32 33.5% 27 34.3% 27 36.2% 26 38.0% 37 35.9% 34 36.3% 30 34.3% 29

Parts 49.1% 44 49.2% 36 47.0% 30 46.0% 29 47.5% 28 53.7% 47 52.6% 42 50.1% 35 50.8% 33

27.9% 17 21.7% 15 32.1% 14 32.9% 14 32.3% 11 36.1% 19 30.6% 16 34.3% 14 35.7% 14

Automobiles (total) 46.3% 113 44.8% 100 42.1% 99 41.4% 91 42.3% 86 46.7% 116 44.1% 104 43.4% 104 42.2% 94

Assembly 57.0% 5 47.5% 4 58.3% 3 65.0% 2 55.0% 1 71.7% 6 65.0% 5 77.5% 4 78.3% 3

Parts 45.8% 108 44.7% 96 41.6% 96 40.8% 89 42.2% 85 45.4% 110 43.1% 99 42.0% 100 41.0% 91

Precision Machinery (total) 27.5% 28 28.2% 28 30.3% 30 29.3% 30 29.3% 28 47.1% 29 43.6% 29 41.8% 31 42.7% 30

Assembly 22.0% 20 23.8% 16 23.9% 19 23.4% 19 22.8% 18 45.0% 21 43.8% 17 43.9% 19 45.0% 19

Parts 41.3% 8 34.2% 12 41.4% 11 39.5% 11 41.0% 10 52.5% 8 43.3% 12 38.3% 12 38.6% 11

Other 26.6% 50 28.0% 43 23.6% 42 23.3% 41 25.5% 41 30.8% 53 32.0% 54 26.7% 48 25.2% 47

Overall 35.6% 509 36.8% 505 33.9% 471 33.2% 456 34.6% 431 39.3% 564 38.7% 560 36.2% 513 35.6% 485

Electrical Equipment & Electronics (total)

Transportation Equipment (excl. Automobiles)

FY2018

(actual)

Overseas Production Ratio ※1 Overseas Sales Ratio ※2

FY2017

(actual)

FY2019

(actual)

FY2020

(projected)Industry

FY2017

(actual)

FY2019

(actual)

FY2020

(projected)

Medium-term

plans(FY2023)

FY2018

(actual)

(1) Net Sales

FY2016 Performance FY2017 Performance FY2018 Performance FY2019 Performance

Average 2.67 Average 2.75 Average 2.70 Average 2.50

1 Vietnam 2.87 1 Vietnam 2.92 1 EU 15 2.82 1 Vietnam 2.64

1 EU 15 2.87 2 EU 15 2.88 1 North America 2.82 1 China 2.64

3 North America 2.84 3 China 2.86 3 Vietnam 2.77 3 Central & Eastern Europe 2.63

4 NIEs 3 2.79 4 NIEs 3 2.79 4 ASEAN 5 2.75 4 North America 2.60

5 Mexico 2.75 5 ASEAN 5 2.77 5 Central & Eastern Europe 2.71 5 NIEs 3 2.56

6 China 2.66 6 North America 2.75 6 China 2.65 6 Turkey 2.55

7 ASEAN 5 2.64 7 Mexico 2.71 6 NIEs 3 2.65 7 EU14/UK 2.47

8 Central & Eastern Europe 2.62 8 Central & Eastern Europe 2.64 8 Mexico 2.63 8 ASEAN 5 2.46

9 Turkey 2.54 8 Turkey 2.64 8 India 2.63 9 Russia 2.43

10 Russia 2.49 10 India 2.61 10 Turkey 2.53 10 Mexico 2.36

11 India 2.48 11 Russia 2.59 11 Brazil 2.42 10 Brazil 2.36

12 Brazil 2.18 12 Brazil 2.51 12 Russia 2.33 12 India 2.28

ASEAN 5　breakdown ASEAN 5　breakdown ASEAN 5　breakdown ASEAN 5　breakdown

1 Philippines 2.78 1 Thailand 2.90 1 Thailand 2.91 1 Singapore 2.55

2 Thailand 2.71 2 Philippines 2.82 2 Indonesia 2.72 2 Philippines 2.52

3 Singapore 2.61 3 Singapore 2.71 3 Singapore 2.71 3 Indonesia 2.43

4 Malaysia 2.56 4 Indonesia 2.68 4 Philippines 2.64 3 Malaysia 2.43

4 Indonesia 2.56 5 Malaysia 2.65 5 Malaysia 2.59 5 Thailand 2.42

(2) Profits

FY2016 Performance FY2017 Performance FY2018 Performance FY2019 Performance

Average 2.65 Average 2.68 Average 2.63 Average 2.47

1 Vietnam 2.86 1 Vietnam 2.85 1 EU 15 2.82 1 China 2.63

2 EU 15 2.84 2 EU 15 2.77 2 Vietnam 2.75 2 Vietnam 2.62

3 NIEs 3 2.77 2 NIEs 3 2.77 3 ASEAN 5 2.68 3 Central & Eastern Europe 2.58

4 Central & Eastern Europe 2.72 4 China 2.75 3 Central & Eastern Europe 2.68 4 NIEs 3 2.57

5 North America 2.68 5 ASEAN 5 2.70 3 North America 2.68 5 Turkey 2.50

5 Mexico 2.68 6 Russia 2.69 6 NIEs 3 2.63 6 North America 2.47

7 ASEAN 5 2.65 7 Central & Eastern Europe 2.63 7 Turkey 2.61 7 ASEAN 5 2.45

8 China 2.64 7 Mexico 2.63 8 Mexico 2.58 8 EU14/UK 2.44

9 Russia 2.61 9 North America 2.58 8 India 2.58 9 India 2.31

10 Turkey 2.53 10 Turkey 2.57 10 China 2.57 10 Russia 2.29

11 India 2.42 11 Brazil 2.56 11 Brazil 2.32 11 Mexico 2.26

12 Brazil 2.18 12 India 2.53 12 Russia 2.28 12 Brazil 2.22

ASEAN 5　breakdown ASEAN 5　breakdown ASEAN 5　breakdown ASEAN 5　breakdown

1 Thailand 2.73 1 Philippines 2.81 1 Thailand 2.88 1 Philippines 2.59

2 Philippines 2.71 2 Thailand 2.80 2 Singapore 2.72 2 Singapore 2.49

3 Malaysia 2.64 3 Singapore 2.71 3 Indonesia 2.57 3 Thailand 2.43

4 Singapore 2.57 4 Indonesia 2.59 4 Philippines 2.51 3 Malaysia 2.43

4 Indonesia 2.57 5 Malaysia 2.56 4 Malaysia 2.51 5 Indonesia 2.39

作成者:2019年度実績のEU15はEU14・英国と表記しました。

Note1: Data of companies which answered both net sales and profits were summed up.

Note2: For the EU, it is written as "EU15" until 2018, and as "EU14 / UK" in 2019.


Net Sales/Profits Satisfaction by Major Countries/Regions２


Net Sales/Profits Satisfaction by Industry２

Net Sales/Profits Satisfaction (FY2019) Countries/Regions with Highest

Average in Satisfaction with Profits

Profits

Note 1: The industries are lined up in order of the size of the numerical value of the average satisfaction with profit. When the figures

are the same, they are lined up in order of the size of the average satisfaction with net sales.

Note 2: The numbers above the graph bars indicate the numbers of respondent companies.

Net Sales

(companies)

8 9 77 60 81 70 13 16 15 12 27 31 11 12 26 15 53 47 52 48 23 18 102 100 7 8 26 25 20 20

(companies)

8 9 77 60 81 70 13 16 15 12 27 31 11 12 26 15 53 47 52 48 23 18 102 100 7 8 26 25 20 20

Food

Petro

leum

& R

ubber

Nonfe

rrous M

eta

ls

Genera

l Machin

ery

Oth

er

Textile

s

Auto

mobile

s

Meta

l Pro

ducts

Paper, P

ulp

& W

ood

Ele

ctric

al E

quip

ment

&E

lectro

nic

s

Chem

icals

Ste

el

Tra

nsporta

tion

Equip

ment

(excl. A

uto

mobile

s)

Pre

cis

ion M

achin

ery

Oth

er

Textile

s

Auto

mobile

s

Cera

mic

s, C

em

ent &

Gla

ss

Cera

mic

s, C

em

ent &

Gla

ss

Meta

l Pro

ducts

Food

Ste

el

Tra

nsporta

tion

Equip

ment

(excl. A

uto

mobile

s)

Pre

cis

ion M

achin

ery

Petro

leum

& R

ubber

Nonfe

rrous M

eta

ls

Genera

l Machin

ery

Chem

icals

Paper, P

ulp

& W

ood

Ele

ctric

al E

quip

ment

&E

lectro

nic

s

3.09

2.64 2.68 2.54

2.40

2.71 2.48

2.59 2.50 2.48 2.45

2.73

3.05

2.80 2.71 2.88

2.66 2.65 2.53 2.50 2.50 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.38 2.36 2.34 2.28 2.23 2.22

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

3.17

2.65 2.78 2.80

2.45

2.74

2.49 2.68

2.51 2.49 2.56

2.84

3.15 2.99

2.78 2.76 2.67 2.72 2.54 2.56 2.48 2.48 2.45 2.45 2.43 2.38 2.42

2.28 2.23 2.29

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

3.17 2.65 2.76 2.67

2.00

3.00

4.00

FY2018 FY2019

1. Paper, Pulp & Wood

EU14 & UK

Thailand

Vietnam

(3.33)

2.Electrical Equipment &

ElectronicsCentral & Eastern Europe (3.40)

3. Chemicals Central & Eastern Europe (3.13)

4. Steel Brazil (3.50)

5.Transportation Equipment

(excl. Automobiles)

Brazil

Singapore

Thailand

(3.00)

6. Precision Machinery Philippines (3.10)

7. Petroleum & RubberIndia

Turkey(3.00)

8. Nonferrous Metals

Brunei

Cambodia

Laos

Malaysia

Myanmar

Russia

Singapore

Turkey

(3.00)

9. General Machinery Mexico (2.87)

10. Other China (2.75)

11. Textiles Russia (3.00)

12. Automobiles Brunei (3.50)

13.Ceramics, Cement &

GlassVietnam (3.00)

14. Metal Products Brazil (3.50)

15. Food Turkey (3.33)

IndustryCountries/regions with highest

average in satisfaction with profits


Future Business Expansions: Stances Toward

Strengthening/Expanding Business by Industry３

Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas Business Expansions (by Industry)

2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020

All Industries 71.4% 59.3% 26.7% 37.9% 2.0% 2.8% All Industries 42.8% 38.9% 50.2% 50.4% 3.2% 3.5% 3.9% 7.2%

Food 81.8% 77.3% 18.2% 22.7% - - Food 63.6% 40.9% 27.3% 54.5% 9.1% 4.5% - -

Textiles 73.9% 42.1% 26.1% 57.9% - - Textiles 39.1% 20.0% 47.8% 65.0% 8.7% 5.0% 4.3% 10.0%

Paper, Pulp & Wood 85.7% 55.6% 14.3% 22.2% - 22.2% Paper, Pulp & Wood 62.5% 55.6% 25.0% 22.2% - - 12.5% 22.2%

Chemicals (total) 74.1% 60.6% 23.5% 38.0% 2.4% 1.4% Chemicals (total) 49.4% 45.8% 43.7% 45.8% 2.3% 4.2% 4.6% 4.2%

Chemicals (incl. plastic products) 73.8% 58.5% 23.8% 40.0% 2.5% 1.5% Chemicals (incl. plastic products) 50.0% 45.5% 42.7% 45.5% 2.4% 4.5% 4.9% 4.5%

Pharmaceuticals 80.0% 83.3% 20.0% 16.7% - - Pharmaceuticals 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 50.0% - - - -

Petroleum & Rubber 66.7% 53.8% 33.3% 46.2% - - Petroleum & Rubber 25.0% - 75.0% 76.9% - - - 23.1%

Ceramics, Cement & Glass 85.7% 66.7% 14.3% 33.3% - - Ceramics, Cement & Glass 28.6% 44.4% 71.4% 33.3% - - - 22.2%

Steel 46.7% 38.9% 46.7% 55.6% 6.7% 5.6% Steel 26.7% 31.6% 73.3% 57.9% - 5.3% - 5.3%

Nonferrous Metals 50.0% 70.6% 42.3% 23.5% 7.7% 5.9% Nonferrous Metals 46.2% 41.2% 50.0% 47.1% 3.8% 5.9% - 5.9%

Metal Products 67.9% 50.0% 28.6% 46.2% 3.6% 3.8% Metal Products 53.6% 52.0% 39.3% 40.0% 3.6% 4.0% 3.6% 4.0%

General Machinery (total) 86.4% 74.5% 13.6% 23.4% - 2.1% General Machinery (total) 37.9% 42.6% 55.2% 55.3% 3.4% - 3.4% 2.1%

Assembly 85.7% 73.2% 14.3% 24.4% - 2.4% Assembly 35.4% 43.9% 56.3% 53.7% 4.2% - 4.2% 2.4%

Parts 90.0% 83.3% 10.0% 16.7% - - Parts 50.0% 33.3% 50.0% 66.7% - - - -

Electrical Equipment & Electronics (total)68.4% 64.5% 31.6% 33.9% - 1.6% Electrical Equipment & Electronics (total)45.6% 46.8% 49.4% 45.2% 1.3% 3.2% 3.8% 4.8%

Assembly 74.3% 69.0% 25.7% 27.6% - 3.4% Assembly 62.9% 44.8% 34.3% 48.3% - 3.4% 2.9% 3.4%

Parts 63.6% 60.6% 36.4% 39.4% - - Parts 31.8% 48.5% 61.4% 42.4% 2.3% 3.0% 4.5% 6.1%

66.7% 57.1% 26.7% 35.7% 6.7% 7.1% 26.7% 28.6% 66.7% 50.0% 6.7% 7.1% - 14.3%

Automobiles (total) 64.4% 46.0% 33.7% 50.0% 1.9% 4.0% Automobiles (total) 29.2% 28.2% 59.4% 58.3% 3.8% 3.9% 7.5% 9.7%

Assembly 80.0% - 20.0% - - 100.0% Assembly - - 50.0% 66.7% 25.0% - 25.0% 33.3%

Parts 63.6% 46.9% 34.3% 51.0% 2.0% 2.0% Parts 30.4% 29.0% 59.8% 58.0% 2.9% 4.0% 6.9% 9.0%

Precision Machinery (total) 82.1% 59.4% 17.9% 40.6% - - Precision Machinery (total) 65.5% 40.6% 27.6% 46.9% 6.9% 6.3% - 6.3%

Assembly 87.5% 65.0% 12.5% 35.0% - - Assembly 70.6% 50.0% 17.6% 45.0% 11.8% - - 5.0%

Parts 75.0% 50.0% 25.0% 50.0% - - Parts 58.3% 25.0% 41.7% 50.0% - 16.7% - 8.3%

Other 75.0% 72.0% 21.2% 26.0% 3.8% 2.0% Other 45.3% 48.0% 50.9% 42.0% - 2.0% 3.8% 8.0%

Maintain

present levelScale back Undecided

Transportation Equipment (excl. Automobiles) Transportation Equipment (excl. Automobiles)

Strengthen

/expand

Maintain

present level

Scale back

/withdraw

Strengthen

/expandOverseas Domestic

Korea Taiwan Hong KongNorth-eastern

China

Northern

China

Eastern

China

Southern

China

Inland

ChinaMexico Brazil Others

Strengthen/expand 23.8% 30.2% 17.8% 41.5% 43.1% 43.7% 40.9% 43.7% 33.8% 30.5% 34.5%

Maintain present level 73.2% 67.7% 72.1% 53.7% 51.1% 53.5% 57.7% 56.3% 60.7% 58.5% 65.5%

Scale back/withdraw 3.0% 2.1% 10.1% 4.9% 5.8% 2.8% 1.4% - 5.5% 11.0% -

Singapore Thailand Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Vietnam Cambodia Laos Myanmar Brunei India Others

Strengthen/expand 31.6% 42.2% 40.0% 40.0% 48.4% 60.6% 41.9% 44.0% 58.1% 25.0% 58.3% 41.3%

Maintain present level 63.2% 56.8% 55.2% 56.4% 50.0% 38.3% 58.1% 56.0% 41.9% 70.0% 38.1% 52.4%

Scale back/withdraw 5.2% 1.0% 4.8% 3.6% 1.6% 1.1% - - - 5.0% 3.6% 6.3%

ASEAN5 Other Asian Countries

NIEs3 China Latin America

ASEAN


Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas Business Expansions３

Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas Business Expansion (Major Countries/Regions)

Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas Business Expansion (Details by Region)

2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020

Strengthen/expand 24.6% 24.7% 46.3% 40.4% 49.9% 42.7% 57.2% 54.0% 52.1% 48.1% 40.4% 32.8%

Maintain present level 73.0% 70.8% 52.0% 56.5% 46.5% 54.5% 41.3% 43.6% 45.6% 48.4% 56.2% 60.5%

Scale back/withdraw 2.4% 4.5% 1.7% 3.0% 3.5% 2.9% 1.6% 2.4% 2.3% 3.5% 3.4% 6.6%

2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020

Strengthen/expand 52.5% 41.5% 39.8% 37.3% 32.3% 37.8% 20.9% 35.3% 36.9% 27.3% 50.8% 40.0% 52.8% 53.5%

Maintain present level 45.1% 53.1% 60.2% 61.2% 66.1% 62.2% 79.1% 64.7% 61.5% 69.1% 49.2% 58.2% 47.2% 46.5%

Scale back/withdraw 2.5% 5.3% - 1.5% 1.6% - - - 1.5% 3.6% - 1.8% - -

AfricaMiddle EastRest of Europe

& CISEU14 & UK

Latin AmericaNIEs3

Central &

Eastern EuropeTurkey Russia

ASEAN5 ChinaOther Asian

CountriesNorth AmericaMajor countries

/Regions

Regions in detail

1

2

3

4

5

6


Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas Business Expansions

(China/NIEs3)３

Prospects for Mid-Term Overseas

Business Expansion (China/NIEs3)

(Sales) Strengthening/Expanding Ways

Source: This regional map was prepared by JBIC

based on "An Overview of Spatial Policy in Asian

and European Countries"(National Spatial Planning

and Regional policy Bureau, Ministry of Land,

Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)).

Note: Of the Guangdong provinces, Hong Kong is

counted as NIEs3 and is not included in the

Southern China region.

(Production) Strengthening/Expanding Ways

1. Northeastern China: Heilongjiang, Jilin, Liaoning

2. Northern China: Beijing, Tientsin, Hebei, Shandong

3. Eastern China: Shanghai, Jiangsu, Anhui, Zhejiang

4. Southern China: Fujian, Guangdong, Hainan

5. Inland China - Central: Shanxi, Henan, Hubei, Jiangxi, Funan

6. Inland China - Western: Sichuan, Chongqing

7. Inland China - Western: Regions other than Sichuan and Chongqing

96 82 159 137 357 325 227 208 102 87 148 129 200 192 193 168

49.0

41.5

45.9 43.1

51.5

43.7

47.1

40.9

57.8

43.7

16.2 17.8

31.0 30.2

24.4 23.8

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20


(companies)

(FY)

KoreaNortheastern

China

Northern

China

Eastern

China

Southern

China

Inland

China

TaiwanHong Kong

- - 0.6 0.74.5 4.9

3.1 3.45.9 6.9

- - 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8

11.513.4

16.419.0

25.828.3

24.226.4

14.7

17.2

1.4 1.6

11.011.5 11.913.7

2.1

2.4

1.3

1.5

4.2

4.6

1.8

1.9

1.0

1.1

- -

0.5 0.5 --

0

10

20

30

40

50

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

(%)

Outsource to others



(FY)

Northeastern

China

Northern

China

Eastern

China

Southern

China

Inland

China

KoreaTaiwanHong Kong

5.2 6.1

1.9 2.2 2.5 2.8 2.6 2.94.9 5.7

- - 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6

12.514.6

11.313.1 13.2

14.510.611.5

10.812.6

8.1 9.3 10.010.4 8.8 10.1

19.8

23.2

15.1

17.5 15.7

17.2

15.016.3

25.5

29.9

6.87.8

12.513.0

6.77.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

(%)




(FY)

Northeastern

China

Northern

China

Eastern

China

Southern

China

Inland

China

KoreaTaiwanHong Kong

54

Prospects for Mid-Term OverseasBusiness Expansions (China/NIEs3)

３

Existence of Real Business Plans in Promising Countries Promising Countries: Potential Countries/Regions in the Mid-Term

Note1: The ratio in the graph was obtained by dividing the number of responding companies that responded “Plans do exist” by the number of companies that named the country as promising.Note2: The figures in parenthesis above the bar graph indicate the number of companies which named the countries as promising in Figure 17.

whether there is a business plan for each country/region that voted as mid-term promising countries. (asked companies that responded to mid-term

promising countries question.)

Question


FY2019 FY2020

■ ■ We have a new business plan

■ ■ We have a business plan for additional investment

■ ■ No concrete plans exist at this point

■ ■ No response

(180) (168) (193) (163) (147) (131) (133) (111) (93) (98) (102) (96) (48) (37) (41) (34) (47) (32) (41) (25) （14）（20）

9.44.8

10.4 8.012.2

8.4 7.5 5.4

17.2 14.3 12.7 12.5 12.516.2

4.9

14.78.5

-9.8 12.0

47.2

34.529.5

23.9

24.526.7

36.8

25.2

37.6

32.7

18.6 16.7

31.329.7

17.1

11.8

46.8

40.6

4.9

12.0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20

China India Vietnam Thailand US Indonesia Philippines Malaysia Mexico Myanmar

(%)

(FY)

FY2020 FY2019

1 China 66 102 ▲ 36

2 India 52 77 ▲ 25

3 Vietnam 46 54 ▲ 8

3 US 46 51 ▲ 5

5 Thailand 34 59 ▲ 25

6 Indonesia 28 32 ▲ 4

7 Philippines 17 21 ▲ 4

8 Mexico 13 26 ▲ 13

9 Malaysia 9 9 0

10 Taiwan 8 7 1

10 Germany 8 4 4

Rank Country

No. of respondent

companies

Change from

last survey

('20-'19)


Promising Countries/Regions: Existence of Business Plan３

Note: Each ratio refers to the number of companies answering ”A new business plan exists”, “A business plan for additional investment

exists”, “No plans” or “No response”, divided by the total number of respondent companies for the respective countries.

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Total 168 100% 163 100% 131 100% 111 100% 98 100% 96 100% 37 100% 34 100% 32 100% 25 100%

A new business

plan exist8 4.8% 13 8.0% 11 8.4% 6 5.4% 14 14.3% 12 12.5% 6 16.2% 5 14.7% 0 0.0% 3 12.0%

A business plan

for additional

investment exist

58 34.5% 39 23.9% 35 26.7% 28 25.2% 32 32.7% 16 16.7% 11 29.7% 4 11.8% 13 40.6% 3 12.0%

No plans 95 56.5% 107 65.6% 83 63.4% 73 65.8% 49 50.0% 65 67.7% 20 54.1% 24 70.6% 19 59.4% 18 72.0%

No response 8 4.8% 4 2.5% 2 1.5% 4 3.6% 3 3.1% 3 3.1% 0 0.0% 1 2.9% 0 0.0% 1 4.0%

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Respondent

companiesRatio

Total 20 100% 18 100% 16 100% 14 100% 12 100% 11 100% 11 100% 9 100% 8 100% 7 100%

A new business

plan exist3 15.0% 2 11.1% 2 12.5% 4 28.6% 0 0.0% 2 18.2% 1 9.1% 0 0.0% 3 37.5% 1 14.3%

A business plan

for additional

investment exist

5 25.0% 6 33.3% 1 6.3% 3 21.4% 2 16.7% 0 0.0% 2 18.2% 4 44.4% 1 12.5% 0 0.0%

No plans 11 55.0% 10 55.6% 12 75.0% 7 50.0% 9 75.0% 9 81.8% 8 72.7% 5 55.6% 4 50.0% 5 71.4%

No response 1 5.0% 0 0.0% 1 6.3% 0 0.0% 1 8.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 14.3%

No. 18 No. 20No. 14 No. 15 No. 16 No. 16 No. 18

No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6

Thailand Mexico MyanmarUS Indonesia Philippines Malaysia

No. 7 No. 8 No. 9 No. 10

Australia Singapore UKBrazil Russia TurkeyKorea

China

Germany Taiwan Bangladesh

India Vietnam

No. 11 No. 12 No. 13


Promising Countries/Regions: Time Series Data３

Promising Countries/Regions over the Mid-Term (Next 3 Years)

Promising Countries/Regions in the Long-Term (Next 10 Years)

No.of

Companies

Percentage

share

No.of

Companies

Percentage

share

No.of

Companies

Percentage

share

No.of

Companies

Percentage

share

No.of

Companies

Percentage

share

356 (%) 404 (%) 431 (%) 444 (%) 483 (%)

1 China 168 47.2 India 193 47.8 China 225 52.2 China 203 45.7 India 230 47.6

2 India 163 45.8 China 180 44.6 India 199 46.2 India 195 43.9 China 203 42.0

3 Vietnam 131 36.8 Vietnam 147 36.4 Thailand 160 37.1 Vietnam 169 38.1 Indonesia 173 35.8

4 Thailand 111 31.2 Thailand 133 32.9 Vietnam 146 33.9 Thailand 153 34.5 Vietnam 158 32.7

5 US 98 27.5 Indonesia 102 25.2 Indonesia 131 30.4 Indonesia 147 33.1 Thailand 142 29.4

6 Indonesia 96 27.0 US 93 23.0 US 124 28.8 US 116 26.1 Mexico 125 25.9

7 Philippines 37 10.4 Philippines 48 11.9 Mexico 59 13.7 Mexico 81 18.2 US 93 19.3

8 Malaysia 34 9.6 Mexico 47 11.6 Philippines 43 10.0 Philippines 47 10.6 Philippines 51 10.6

9 Mexico 32 9.0 Myanmar 41 10.1 Myanmar 37 8.6 Myanmar 40 9.0 Myanmar 49 10.1

10 Myanmar 25 7.0 Malaysia Malaysia 36 8.4 Brazil 28 6.3 Brazil 35 7.2

11 Germany 20 5.6 Taiwan 18 4.5 Germany 25 5.8 Korea Malaysia 33 6.8

12 Taiwan 18 5.1 Korea 15 3.7 Brazil 24 5.6 Malaysia 26 5.9 Singapore 23 4.8

13 Bangladesh 16 4.5 Singapore Korea 22 5.1 Russia 19 4.3 Taiwan 22 4.6

14 Australia 14 3.9 Germany 14 3.5 Taiwan 19 4.4 Singapore 17 3.8 Germany 20 4.1

15 Korea 12 3.4 Australia 13 3.2 Russia 16 3.7 Taiwan Russia 17 3.5

16 Singapore 11 3.1 Cambodia 12 3.0 Singapore 15 3.5 Germany 13 2.9 Korea 15 3.1

17 Brazil Brazil 11 2.7 Cambodia 13 3.0 Turkey 12 2.7 Turkey 12 2.5

18 UK 9 2.5 Russia 9 2.2 Australia 12 2.8 Australia 10 2.3 Cambodia

19 Russia 8 2.2 France Turkey 9 2.1 Canada Australia 11 2.3

20 Turkey 7 2.0 Turkey 8 2.0 Laos 7 1.6 Cambodia 9 2.0 Iran 8 1.7

France

RankFY2016

Survey

FY2017

Survey

FY2018

Survey

FY2020

Survey

FY2019

Survey

No.of

Companies

Percentage

share

No.of

Companies

Percentage

share

264 (%) 296 (%)

1 India 140 53.0 India 155 52.4

2 China 116 43.9 China 119 40.2

3 Vietnam 82 31.1 Vietnam 103 34.8

4 US 73 27.7 Indonesia 84 28.4

5 Indonesia 71 26.9 Thailand 73 24.7

6 Thailand 61 23.1 US 62 20.9

7 Mexico 30 11.4 Myanmar 39 13.2

8 Myanmar 26 9.8 Mexico 35 11.8

9 Philippines 25 9.5 Philippines

10 Brazil 22 8.3 Malaysia 25 8.4

RankFY2020

Survey

FY2019

Survey


Promising Countries/Regions: SMEs３

Chart 3-17. Promising Countries for Overseas Business over the Mid-term (Next 3 Years)(SMEs)

Please provide us with the names of up to 5 countries

that you consider to have promising prospects for

business operations over the mid-term (next 3 years).

(Multiple answers allowed)

Question

*Percentage of votes (%) =Number of votes for country / Number of respondent companies

Note: Countries with the same rank were ordered based upon their rank in the previous survey

2020 2019

(Total) 129 137

1 － 1 India 54 62 41.9 45.3

2 － 2 China 50 53 38.8 38.7

3 － 3 Vietnam 46 46 35.7 33.6

4 5 Thailand 43 35 33.3 25.5

5 4 Indonesia 33 36 25.6 26.3

6 － 6 US 29 27 22.5 19.7

7 8 Philippines 17 20 13.2 14.6

8 7 Mexico 15 23 11.6 16.8

8 10 Malaysia 15 11 11.6 8.0

10 9 Myanmar 12 16 9.3 11.7

11 13 Germany 9 4 7.0 2.9

12 15 Bangladesh 7 3 5.4 2.2

12 15 Taiwan 7 3 5.4 2.2

14 15 Singapore 4 3 3.1 2.2

14 21 UK 4 2 3.1 1.5

17 13 Australia 3 4 2.3 2.9

17 15 France 3 3 2.3 2.2

17 21 Laos 3 2 2.3 1.5

20 11 Cambodia 2 7 1.6 5.1

20 12 Korea 2 6 1.6 4.4

20 － 15 Italy 2 3 1.6 2.2

20 15 Turkey 2 3 1.6 2.2

20 － Hungary 2 - 1.6 -

20 － Netherlands 2 - 1.6 -

20 － UAE 2 - 1.6 -

RankingNo. of

Companies

Percentage

Share(%)

2020 ← 2019 2020 2019Country/Region


Promising Countries/Regions: Details of Promising Reasons３

Note1: The number of responding companies refers to the number of companies that cited reasons for a country being promising.

Note2: The colored cell indicate the top three reasons most often cited for each country.

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

No. of respondent companies 167 100% 160 100% 131 100% 111 100% 96 100% 92 100% 35 100% 34 100% 31 100% 25 100%

1. Qualified human resources 23 13.8% 31 19.4% 33 25.2% 20 18.0% 16 16.7% 8 8.7% 6 17.1% 2 5.9% - 0.0% 1 4.0%

2. Inexpensive source of labor 15 9.0% 56 35.0% 56 42.7% 23 20.7% - 0.0% 28 30.4% 16 45.7% 4 11.8% 13 41.9% 13 52.0%

3. Inexpensive components/raw materials 25 15.0% 18 11.3% 11 8.4% 8 7.2% 1 1.0% 4 4.3% 1 2.9% 2 5.9% 2 6.5% 1 4.0%

4. Supply base for assemblers 33 19.8% 33 20.6% 17 13.0% 21 18.9% 13 13.5% 15 16.3% 6 17.1% 4 11.8% 20 64.5% 1 4.0%

5. Concentration of industry 38 22.8% 14 8.8% 6 4.6% 26 23.4% 23 24.0% 6 6.5% 3 8.6% 5 14.7% 9 29.0% - 0.0%

6. Good for risk diversification to other countries 2 1.2% 10 6.3% 19 14.5% 12 10.8% 5 5.2% 5 5.4% 7 20.0% 5 14.7% 1 3.2% 2 8.0%

7. Base of export to Japan 14 8.4% 6 3.8% 16 12.2% 11 9.9% 2 2.1% 8 8.7% 4 11.4% 1 2.9% - 0.0% 1 4.0%

8. Base of export to third countries 15 9.0% 21 13.1% 20 15.3% 27 24.3% 1 1.0% 19 20.7% 4 11.4% 3 8.8% 10 32.3% 3 12.0%

9. Advantages in terms of raw material procurement 14 8.4% 5 3.1% 3 2.3% 4 3.6% 5 5.2% 3 3.3% 1 2.9% 1 2.9% - 0.0% - 0.0%

10. Current size of local market 111 66.5% 57 35.6% 27 20.6% 43 38.7% 72 75.0% 32 34.8% 8 22.9% 9 26.5% 6 19.4% 1 4.0%

11. Future growth potential of local market 97 58.1% 122 76.3% 78 59.5% 47 42.3% 45 46.9% 64 69.6% 19 54.3% 14 41.2% 14 45.2% 16 64.0%

12. Profitability of local market 22 13.2% 11 6.9% 8 6.1% 15 13.5% 27 28.1% 3 3.3% 4 11.4% 1 2.9% 2 6.5% 1 4.0%

13. Base for product development 13 7.8% 4 2.5% 1 0.8% 4 3.6% 16 16.7% - 0.0% - 0.0% - 0.0% - 0.0% - 0.0%

14. Developed local infrastructure 21 12.6% - 0.0% 5 3.8% 20 18.0% 32 33.3% 3 3.3% 2 5.7% 6 17.6% 2 6.5% 1 4.0%

15. Developed local logistics services 11 6.6% 1 0.6% 4 3.1% 7 6.3% 18 18.8% - 0.0% - 0.0% 1 2.9% - 0.0% - 0.0%

16. Tax incentives for investment 4 2.4% 4 2.5% 9 6.9% 8 7.2% 4 4.2% 1 1.1% 4 11.4% 3 8.8% - 0.0% 1 4.0%

17. Stable policies to attract foreign investment 3 1.8% 2 1.3% 5 3.8% 4 3.6% 4 4.2% 3 3.3% 4 11.4% - 0.0% 1 3.2% 2 8.0%

18. Social/political situation stable 2 1.2% 3 1.9% 16 12.2% 12 10.8% 21 21.9% 2 2.2% 2 5.7% 4 11.8% 1 3.2% - 0.0%

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

No. of respondent companies 187 100% 176 100% 143 100% 131 100% 99 100% 92 100% 46 100% 46 100% 40 100% 40 100%

1. Qualified human resources 35 18.7% 17 9.7% 38 26.6% 28 21.4% 6 6.1% 11 12.0% 7 15.2% 2 4.3% 6 15.0% 5 12.5%

2. Inexpensive source of labor 58 31.0% 13 7.4% 62 43.4% 24 18.3% 26 26.3% 1 1.1% 20 43.5% 12 26.1% 24 60.0% 5 12.5%

3. Inexpensive components/raw materials 24 12.8% 15 8.5% 12 8.4% 8 6.1% 5 5.1% - 0.0% - 0.0% 2 4.3% 1 2.5% 3 7.5%

4. Supply base for assemblers 41 21.9% 42 23.9% 25 17.5% 29 22.1% 16 16.2% 20 21.7% 7 15.2% 28 60.9% 1 2.5% 6 15.0%

5. Concentration of industry 24 12.8% 36 20.5% 14 9.8% 37 28.2% 10 10.1% 22 23.9% 3 6.5% 13 28.3% 2 5.0% 3 7.5%

6. Good for risk diversification to other countries 12 6.4% 3 1.7% 27 18.9% 15 11.5% 8 8.1% 3 3.3% 2 4.3% 3 6.5% 4 10.0% 9 22.5%

7. Base of export to Japan 5 2.7% 13 7.4% 15 10.5% 10 7.6% 8 8.1% 3 3.3% 8 17.4% - 0.0% 3 7.5% 1 2.5%

8. Base of export to third countries 27 14.4% 18 10.2% 20 14.0% 35 26.7% 15 15.2% 5 5.4% 5 10.9% 14 30.4% 7 17.5% 5 12.5%

9. Advantages in terms of raw material procurement 6 3.2% 8 4.5% 1 0.7% 6 4.6% 3 3.0% 2 2.2% 2 4.3% 1 2.2% - 0.0% 2 5.0%

10. Current size of local market 69 36.9% 107 60.8% 27 18.9% 53 40.5% 42 42.4% 64 69.6% 10 21.7% 12 26.1% 4 10.0% 11 27.5%

11. Future growth potential of local market 139 74.3% 99 56.3% 91 63.6% 56 42.7% 60 60.6% 40 43.5% 24 52.2% 21 45.7% 22 55.0% 15 37.5%

12. Profitability of local market 6 3.2% 21 11.9% 13 9.1% 19 14.5% 7 7.1% 17 18.5% 7 15.2% 1 2.2% 1 2.5% - 0.0%

13. Base for product development 11 5.9% 10 5.7% 1 0.7% 7 5.3% - 0.0% 6 6.5% - 0.0% - 0.0% - 0.0% 1 2.5%

14. Developed local infrastructure 5 2.7% 25 14.2% 13 9.1% 29 22.1% 2 2.0% 24 26.1% 2 4.3% 3 6.5% - 0.0% 4 10.0%

15. Developed local logistics services 2 1.1% 13 7.4% 6 4.2% 12 9.2% - 0.0% 10 10.9% - 0.0% 1 2.2% - 0.0% 2 5.0%

16. Tax incentives for investment 1 0.5% 6 3.4% 9 6.3% 15 11.5% 2 2.0% 1 1.1% 2 4.3% 1 2.2% 1 2.5% 2 5.0%

17. Stable policies to attract foreign investment 4 2.1% 3 1.7% 7 4.9% 5 3.8% 5 5.1% - 0.0% 4 8.7% - 0.0% 1 2.5% 2 5.0%

18. Social/political situation stable 7 3.7% 5 2.8% 23 16.1% 11 8.4% 5 5.1% 14 15.2% 3 6.5% - 0.0% - 0.0% 3 7.5%

61 2 3 4 5China India Vietnam Thailand US Myanmar

7 8 9 10

6

Indonesia Philippines Malaysia Mexico

1 2 3 4 5

India China Vietnam Thailand Indonesia

7 8 9 9

US Philippines Mexico Myanmar MalaysiaFY2019 Survey

FY2020 Survey


Promising Countries/Regions: Details of Issues３

Note1: The number of respondent companies refers to the number of companies that cited issues.

Note2: The colored cell indicate the top three reasons most often cited for each country.

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

No. of responding companies 156 100% 134 100% 109 100% 88 100% 78 100% 72 100% 30 100% 25 100% 20 100% 19 100%

1. Underdeveloped legal system 12 7.7% 17 12.7% 18 16.5% 5 5.7% - 0.0% 12 16.7% 4 13.3% 2 8.0% - 0.0% 10 52.6%

2. Execution of legal system unclear 76 48.7% 46 34.3% 39 35.8% 13 14.8% 2 2.6% 25 34.7% 10 33.3% 3 12.0% 2 10.0% 5 26.3%

3. Complicated tax system 19 12.2% 35 26.1% 10 9.2% 3 3.4% 1 1.3% 8 11.1% 2 6.7% 3 12.0% 2 10.0% 2 10.5%

4. Execution of tax system unclear 24 15.4% 33 24.6% 14 12.8% 7 8.0% 2 2.6% 12 16.7% 4 13.3% 4 16.0% - 0.0% 3 15.8%

5. Increased taxation 29 18.6% 17 12.7% 11 10.1% 10 11.4% 10 12.8% 11 15.3% 2 6.7% 2 8.0% 1 5.0% 1 5.3%

6. Restrictions on foreign investment 40 25.6% 11 8.2% 12 11.0% 10 11.4% - 0.0% 11 15.3% 5 16.7% 2 8.0% - 0.0% 3 15.8%

7. Complicated/unclear procedures for investment permission 19 12.2% 15 11.2% 11 10.1% 4 4.5% 1 1.3% 11 15.3% 3 10.0% 3 12.0% 1 5.0% 4 21.1%

8. Insufficient protection for intellectual property rights 58 37.2% 10 7.5% 3 2.8% 4 4.5% 1 1.3% 3 4.2% 2 6.7% 2 8.0% - 0.0% 2 10.5%9. Restrictions on foreign currency/ transfers of money overseas 51 32.7% 12 9.0% 10 9.2% 2 2.3% 1 1.3% 5 6.9% 1 3.3% 1 4.0% 1 5.0% 2 10.5%

10. Import restrictions/customs procedures 32 20.5% 14 10.4% 8 7.3% 3 3.4% 4 5.1% 9 12.5% 2 6.7% 2 8.0% 1 5.0% - 0.0%

11. Difficult to secure technical/engineering staff 26 16.7% 20 14.9% 17 15.6% 20 22.7% 18 23.1% 21 29.2% 6 20.0% 10 40.0% 7 35.0% 4 21.1%

12. Difficult to secure management-level staff 27 17.3% 34 25.4% 29 26.6% 30 34.1% 18 23.1% 19 26.4% 8 26.7% 14 56.0% 8 40.0% 9 47.4%

13. Rising labor costs 98 62.8% 26 19.4% 33 30.3% 34 38.6% 24 30.8% 29 40.3% 9 30.0% 6 24.0% 3 15.0% 2 10.5%

14. Labor problems 26 16.7% 24 17.9% 12 11.0% 7 8.0% 9 11.5% 12 16.7% 3 10.0% 2 8.0% 1 5.0% 2 10.5%

15. Intense competition with other companies 107 68.6% 56 41.8% 35 32.1% 54 61.4% 55 70.5% 27 37.5% 5 16.7% 14 56.0% 8 40.0% 4 21.1%

16. Difficulties in recovering money owed 42 26.9% 29 21.6% 8 7.3% 9 10.2% - 0.0% 6 8.3% 3 10.0% 2 8.0% - 0.0% 4 21.1%

17. Difficulty in raising funds 6 3.8% 7 5.2% 2 1.8% 2 2.3% - 0.0% 3 4.2% - 0.0% 1 4.0% 1 5.0% 1 5.3%

18. Underdeveloped local supporting industries 2 1.3% 12 9.0% 13 11.9% 3 3.4% 2 2.6% 11 15.3% 5 16.7% 6 24.0% 3 15.0% 6 31.6%

19. Sense of instability regarding currency and/or costs 3 1.9% 17 12.7% 5 4.6% 2 2.3% - 0.0% 12 16.7% 2 6.7% 5 20.0% 2 10.0% 4 21.1%

20. Underdeveloped infrastructure 7 4.5% 49 36.6% 15 13.8% 4 4.5% - 0.0% 16 22.2% 8 26.7% 1 4.0% - 0.0% 13 68.4%

21. Security/social instability 33 21.2% 41 30.6% 4 3.7% 10 11.4% 5 6.4% 21 29.2% 14 46.7% 9 36.0% 1 5.0% 5 26.3%

22. Lack of information on the country 3 1.9% 16 11.9% 14 12.8% 4 4.5% 2 2.6% 5 6.9% - 0.0% 3 12.0% 2 10.0% 7 36.8%

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

#

companie

s

Ratio

No. of responding companies 161 100% 155 100% 113 100% 104 100% 82 100% 67 100% 38 100% 34 100% 30 100% 28 100%

1. Underdeveloped legal system 22 13.7% 9 5.8% 21 18.6% 2 1.9% 13 15.9% 1 1.5% 1 2.6% 6 17.6% 12 40.0% 2 7.1%

2. Execution of legal system unclear 60 37.3% 65 41.9% 33 29.2% 10 9.6% 27 32.9% 4 6.0% 3 7.9% 10 29.4% 10 33.3% 3 10.7%

3. Complicated tax system 39 24.2% 16 10.3% 7 6.2% 5 4.8% 8 9.8% 1 1.5% 5 13.2% - 0.0% 2 6.7% - 0.0%

4. Execution of tax system unclear 33 20.5% 28 18.1% 20 17.7% 13 12.5% 9 11.0% 4 6.0% 4 10.5% - 0.0% 5 16.7% 1 3.6%

5. Increased taxation 16 9.9% 30 19.4% 10 8.8% 11 10.6% 8 9.8% 10 14.9% 2 5.3% 3 8.8% 2 6.7% - 0.0%

6. Restrictions on foreign investment 21 13.0% 38 24.5% 9 8.0% 13 12.5% 11 13.4% 2 3.0% 2 5.3% 5 14.7% 3 10.0% 1 3.6%

7. Complicated/unclear procedures for investment permission 30 18.6% 25 16.1% 7 6.2% 4 3.8% 12 14.6% - 0.0% 1 2.6% 3 8.8% 1 3.3% 3 10.7%

8. Insufficient protection for intellectual property rights 12 7.5% 55 35.5% 10 8.8% 3 2.9% 3 3.7% - 0.0% 1 2.6% 1 2.9% 2 6.7% 2 7.1%9. Restrictions on foreign currency/ transfers of money overseas 30 18.6% 46 29.7% 16 14.2% 2 1.9% 7 8.5% 1 1.5% - 0.0% 1 2.9% 1 3.3% - 0.0%

10. Import restrictions/customs procedures 21 13.0% 33 21.3% 14 12.4% 6 5.8% 10 12.2% 6 9.0% 3 7.9% 1 2.9% 5 16.7% 3 10.7%

11. Difficult to secure technical/engineering staff 31 19.3% 33 21.3% 22 19.5% 27 26.0% 16 19.5% 13 19.4% 18 47.4% 5 14.7% 8 26.7% 7 25.0%

12. Difficult to secure management-level staff 32 19.9% 36 23.2% 33 29.2% 33 31.7% 21 25.6% 11 16.4% 20 52.6% 9 26.5% 8 26.7% 6 21.4%

13. Rising labor costs 35 21.7% 104 67.1% 35 31.0% 51 49.0% 27 32.9% 22 32.8% 15 39.5% 6 17.6% 5 16.7% 4 14.3%

14. Labor problems 32 19.9% 24 15.5% 17 15.0% 4 3.8% 14 17.1% 4 6.0% 6 15.8% 1 2.9% 3 10.0% 3 10.7%

15. Intense competition with other companies 61 37.9% 93 60.0% 40 35.4% 65 62.5% 33 40.2% 42 62.7% 8 21.1% 6 17.6% 6 20.0% 9 32.1%

16. Difficulties in recovering money owed 24 14.9% 36 23.2% 5 4.4% 4 3.8% 2 2.4% 1 1.5% 3 7.9% 1 2.9% 1 3.3% - 0.0%

17. Difficulty in raising funds 11 6.8% 7 4.5% 4 3.5% 1 1.0% 3 3.7% - 0.0% 2 5.3% 1 2.9% 4 13.3% 2 7.1%

18. Underdeveloped local supporting industries 25 15.5% 3 1.9% 20 17.7% 7 6.7% 9 11.0% - 0.0% 7 18.4% 4 11.8% 13 43.3% 2 7.1%

19. Sense of instability regarding currency and/or costs 14 8.7% 7 4.5% 8 7.1% - 0.0% 11 13.4% - 0.0% 6 15.8% 1 2.9% 5 16.7% 2 7.1%

20. Underdeveloped infrastructure 70 43.5% 7 4.5% 21 18.6% 2 1.9% 18 22.0% - 0.0% 1 2.6% 4 11.8% 20 66.7% - 0.0%

21. Security/social instability 27 16.8% 19 12.3% 5 4.4% 18 17.3% 24 29.3% 3 4.5% 20 52.6% 12 35.3% 4 13.3% - 0.0%

22. Lack of information on the country 24 14.9% 3 1.9% 11 9.7% 1 1.0% 6 7.3% 2 3.0% 2 5.3% 2 5.9% 8 26.7% 1 3.6%

7 98 10China India Vietnam Thailand US

61 2 3 4 5Indonesia Philippines MalaysiaMexico Myanmar

87 9 10

India China Vietnam Thailand Indonesia

1 2 3 4 5 6

US PhilippinesMexico Myanmar MalaysiaFY2019 Survey

FY2020 Survey

0

50

100

150

200

250

Nov-19 Dec-19 Jan-20 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct~

China NIEs3 ASEAN Europe North America Japan Latin America

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Month

ly new

cases

Num

ber o

f respondin

g c

om

panie

s

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200


Month

ly new

cases

Num

ber o

f respondin

g c

om

panie

s

60

Impact of COVID-19 on the Supply Chain４

◼ Peaks and impacts differ between China and ASEAN

• We cross analyzed the impacted timing and country/region. As a result, it was found that the

impact was observed during the four months from February to May in China, while the

impact was concentrated during the two months from April to May in ASEAN. In the

interview, it was said that "In China, there was a production impact in February to March,

and although orders recovered after that, restrictions remained on traffic and logistics for a

while. On the other hand, in ASEAN, the lockdown also affected production, but after that,

the operation gradually resumed and the impact was relatively short. (automobile parts etc.)”

Other company said that “Until March, we managed to avoid the impact because orders

from the previous year remained, but in April, orders for half a year stopped, and production

adjustments were made sharply. (general machinery)” , which is pointing out the Japanese

business custom.

Comparison of the Most Impacted Month and Country/Region Comparison to the number of infected people

China

Japan

ASEAN


0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

0

50

100

150

200

250


Month

ly new

cases

Num

ber o

f respondin

g c

om

panie

s

Note 1: The bar chart showing the transition of the number of infected people, prepared by JBIC based on the announcement of Johns Hopkins University.

Note 2: The number of infected people in ASEAN is the total number of people infected in ASEAN5


Most Impacted Month (by Industry)４

IndustryNumber of

responding companiesNov-19 Dec-19 Jan-20 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct~ No Impact

Total 508 1 2 33 167 236 338 313 193 96 67 41 33 22

Food 22 0 1 4 7 13 14 13 7 3 1 1 0 2

Textiles 20 0 0 2 8 6 10 12 4 4 3 2 3 0

Paper, Pulp & wood 9 0 0 0 4 5 6 6 6 4 3 1 1 0

Chemicals (subtotal) 72 0 0 6 27 37 48 40 29 14 12 9 8 4

Chemicals (including plastics) 66 0 0 6 25 34 46 37 26 12 10 7 6 2

Pharmaceuticals 6 0 0 0 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2

Petroleum & Rubber 13 0 0 1 3 9 9 8 7 3 1 1 0 1

Ceramics, Cement & Glass 10 0 0 0 2 4 7 6 4 2 1 0 0 0

Steel 15 0 0 3 2 1 9 11 7 6 2 1 0 0

Nonferrous Metals 18 0 0 0 4 4 11 13 7 4 3 2 2 1

Metal Products 24 0 0 1 7 8 11 11 9 5 4 3 2 2

General Machinary (subtotal) 47 0 0 3 11 19 31 25 23 15 11 6 6 3

General Machinary (assembler) 41 0 0 2 9 18 27 23 21 14 11 6 6 3

General Machinary (parts) 6 0 0 1 2 1 4 2 2 1 0 0 0 0

Electrical Equipment & Electronics (subtotal) 61 0 0 4 28 34 44 30 13 6 5 2 2 2

Electrical Equipment & Electronics (assembler) 27 0 0 2 14 17 20 13 6 4 3 1 2 0

Electrical Equipment & Electronics (parts) 34 0 0 2 14 17 24 17 7 2 2 1 0 2

Transportation Equipment (excl. automobiles) 14 0 0 1 3 5 6 9 3 1 2 1 1 1

Automobiles (subtotal) 105 1 1 4 35 48 86 88 48 11 6 4 3 0

Automobiles (assembler) 4 0 0 0 1 2 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0

Automobiles (parts) 101 1 1 4 34 46 82 85 47 11 6 4 3 0

Precision Machinery (subtotal) 31 0 0 4 12 18 21 16 12 9 6 3 2 1

Precision Machinery (assembler) 20 0 0 2 6 10 12 10 8 6 4 3 2 0

Precision Machinery (parts) 11 0 0 2 6 8 9 6 4 3 2 0 0 1

Others 47 0 0 0 14 25 25 25 14 9 7 5 3 5


Heterogeneities in Degree of Efforts towards SDGs

(by Industry)５

Number of

responding

companies

Not yet

implemented in

business

Considering

implementing in

business/ in its

strategy

Implemented in

PR/CSR

Implemented in

business/ in its

strategy

Total 504 158 159 142 127

Food 20 7 6 5 4

Textiles 20 6 6 7 6

Paper, Pulp &

Wood9 2 3 4 3

Chemicals 70 17 26 28 20

Petroleum &

Rubber13 4 3 3 4

Ceramics, Cement

& Glass10 2 5 1 3

Steel 18 8 3 5 3

Nonferrous Metals 18 7 5 6 4

Metal Products 24 11 5 4 6

General

Machinery47 15 13 16 12

Electrical

Equipment &

Electronics

64 17 20 22 15

Transportation

Equipment14 3 7 2 4

Automobiles 101 37 31 21 24

Precision

Machinery30 8 9 9 9

Others 46 14 17 9 10


Motivations behind Efforts towards SDGs(by Industry)５

Number of

responding

companies

Increased interest from

consumers,

buyers and professional

federations

Self motivated

Request from

procurers/suppli

ers

Requirement from

local authority

Relationship

management

with investors

Relationship

management

with financial

institutions

Parent company,

group company

Influence from

competitors

Total 451 259 214 97 41 141 46 47 61

Automobiles 94 45 40 35 14 18 13 11 11

Chemicals 65 37 39 14 6 30 7 9 10

Electrical

Equipment &

Electronics

56 35 31 9 3 22 7 4 8

General

Machinery41 26 19 10 3 13 5 6 6

Precision

Machinery27 17 12 4 3 6 1 5 3

Metal Products 21 13 6 2 3 11 2 0 1

Textiles 19 14 9 4 2 4 1 1 3

Food 18 12 11 2 0 3 1 2 3

Nonferrous

Metals16 5 8 5 2 5 1 1 1

Steel 14 8 3 4 3 5 3 0 2

Petroleum &

Rubber12 8 6 1 0 6 1 0 4

Transportation

Equipment12 5 5 0 0 2 0 2 1

Paper, Pulp &

Wood8 6 3 3 0 2 0 1 3

Ceramics,

Cement & Glass8 2 5 1 1 5 1 2 1

Others 40 26 17 3 1 9 3 3 4


Implementation Hurdles(by Industry)５

Number of

responding

companies

Lack of information Lack of HR

Compatibility

between business

and SDGs

Reluctance from

management side

Reluctance from

field side

Total 455 128 177 230 107 179

Food 19 7 6 6 4 7

Textiles 17 5 8 8 4 5

Paper, Pulp & Wood9 1 3 4 1 4

Chemicals 66 14 27 39 13 27

Petroleum & Rubber11 4 5 5 2 2

Ceramics, Cement

& Glass6 2 3 2 1 2

Steel 14 6 5 10 4 5

Nonferrous Metals 17 6 6 5 3 6

Metal Products 21 5 9 9 8 11

General Machinery 44 10 17 22 13 21

Electrical Equipment

& Electronics56 16 23 26 13 22

Transportation

Equipment11 1 2 6 3 4

Automobiles 94 30 36 52 25 39

Precision Machinery27 9 12 16 3 6

Others 43 12 15 20 10 18

65

Goals Popular for Japanese Companies

(Present) (by Industry)５


Present

Number of

responding

companies

Automobiles Chemicals

Electrical

Equipment &

Electronics

General

Machinery

Precision

Machinery

Metal

ProductsFood Textiles Steel

Nonfer

rous

Metals

Transportatio

n Equipment

Petroleum &

Rubber

Ceramics,

Cement &

Glass

Paper, Pulp &

WoodOthers

Total 529 107 74 65 48 32 26 22 20 19 19 14 13 10 9 51

1: No Poverty 33 8 5 6 4 1 0 1 3 3 0 0 1 0 0 1

2:Zero Hunger 45 5 12 8 5 1 0 5 3 2 0 0 0 0 2 2

3:Good Health and

Well-being160 28 29 19 12 11 6 9 9 4 4 4 2 2 6 15

4:Quality Education 89 20 18 16 9 5 3 3 1 4 1 2 2 0 1 4

5:Gender Equality 114 25 22 17 8 6 2 3 6 4 4 2 2 1 3 9

6:Clean Water and

Sanitation93 15 22 10 10 5 1 1 5 4 3 0 1 2 5 9

7:Affordable and

Clean Energy219 42 34 33 26 14 10 6 6 9 9 4 5 3 6 12

8:Decent Work and

Economic Growth200 40 31 30 17 14 9 7 7 8 6 7 5 3 6 10

9:Industry, Innovation

and Infrastructure200 38 35 35 20 17 9 2 5 6 8 5 2 3 5 10

10:Reduce

inequalities87 24 15 15 7 2 1 4 3 3 3 0 2 1 2 5

11:Sustainable Cities

and Communities129 21 30 24 13 3 4 1 3 4 5 3 3 3 4 8

12:Responsible

Consumption and

Production

230 44 43 31 19 11 9 10 9 9 8 6 4 2 6 19

13:Climate Action 168 32 32 28 18 8 5 5 7 6 5 4 3 2 3 10

14:Life Below Water 83 9 14 10 11 2 2 6 6 4 3 0 0 2 5 9

15:Life on Land 82 12 17 8 10 5 2 3 6 2 4 0 0 2 6 5

16:Peace, Justice

and Strong

Institutions

93 26 15 14 8 4 2 3 4 2 2 0 2 2 4 5

17:Partnerships for

the Goals78 16 16 13 11 3 0 1 5 2 3 1 0 1 3 3


５ Goals Popular for Japanese Companies

(Future) (by Industry)

Future

Number of

responding

companies

Automobiles Chemicals

Electrical

Equipment

&

Electronics

General

Machinery

Precision

MachineryMetal Products Food Textiles Steel

Nonferrous

Metals

Transportation

Equipment

Petroleum

& Rubber

Ceramics,

Cement &

Glass

Paper,

Pulp &

Wood

Others

Total 529 107 74 65 48 32 26 22 20 19 19 14 13 10 9 51

1: No Poverty 65 12 9 10 7 6 2 3 3 2 2 1 3 0 1 4

2:Zero Hunger 66 9 17 8 7 6 0 6 4 1 3 1 1 0 1 2

3:Good Health and

Well-being148 29 32 18 8 9 4 7 6 5 6 1 5 1 3 15

4:Quality Education 100 22 16 18 9 6 4 1 3 2 6 2 2 0 2 8

5:Gender Equality 119 28 25 17 6 6 3 4 7 2 4 4 2 0 2 10

6:Clean Water and

Sanitation93 13 26 12 8 8 1 1 4 1 6 0 1 2 3 9

7:Affordable and

Clean Energy197 40 34 28 20 7 9 6 9 6 10 3 6 3 3 14

8:Decent Work and

Economic Growth194 43 35 26 18 9 10 4 6 8 6 4 6 1 3 17

9:Industry, Innovation

and Infrastructure205 47 35 31 19 12 10 3 8 6 9 4 5 1 3 14

10:Reduce

inequalities81 20 17 14 6 4 0 3 3 1 5 1 1 0 2 5

11:Sustainable Cities

and Communities115 22 27 18 10 5 5 0 4 4 6 1 3 2 3 7

12:Responsible

Consumption and

Production

201 43 40 26 14 8 9 6 5 8 7 3 6 1 4 23

13:Climate Action 160 34 32 23 11 8 5 6 6 5 6 3 3 1 2 16

14:Life Below Water 99 11 27 12 9 6 1 6 6 1 4 0 3 1 3 9

15:Life on Land 84 11 21 12 6 3 3 4 5 2 4 0 3 1 4 516:Peace, Justice

and Strong Institutions91 25 15 13 7 7 2 2 6 1 6 1 1 1 2 3

17:Partnerships for

the Goals92 19 18 17 7 7 3 1 3 2 4 1 2 0 3 6

Considering implementing

in business/ in its strategy

Not yet implemented in

business

Q1 159 158

Q4 120 47

1 9 1

2 10 1

3 48 10

4 24 6

5 30 10

6 27 4

7 66 19

8 59 20

9 66 18

10 26 7

11 32 6

12 68 20

13 46 7

14 20 4

15 20 4

16 26 9

17 23 4

Negligeable answers 39 111

Degree of

implementation towards

SDGs

Number of companies

selecting 17goals

17goals

on w

hic

h c

om

panie

s a

re w

ork

ing.


Potentiality of Japanese manufacturers in SDGs５

17goals on which companies are working (by Degree of implementation)

◼ Almost half of companies that donot explicitly implement SDGs still undertake similar activities (without SDGs label)-indicating a potential for Japanesemanufacturers to do more on SDGs.

• “Although there are already individual efforts at our headquarter, we have not yet found new business opportunities with the SDGs, so we are considering it.(chemicals) “. Even companies that answered "not working" or “considering” are possibly engaged in activities that could be counted as SDGs because for instance, Japanese manufacturers largely comply with environmental management systems and/or ISO standards (based on desktop research).

• Asking about the current efforts for 17 goals of SDGs, including 158 companies “not yet implemented in business”, 47 companies have selected some goals.

• “The efforts themselves have been made, but the organization from the viewpoint of SDGs is yet to be done" (electrical equipment & electronics) and “there is a possibility that the parent company will give instructions on group goals regarding the items on the list (labor practices, compliance, corporate governance, etc.). (automobiles) ” suggesting that corporate activities are being reviewed from the SDGs perspective.

# companies

Q1: 504/ Q2: 346

No. Logo Examples of SDGs initiatives in oversea business development

1 No Poverty

・ Design and manufacture products for emerging countries

・ Expand the proportion of local procurement of parts in emerging countries

・ Providing vocational guidance to local communities around the factory to increase income generation

2 Zero Hunger

・ Contribute to the efficiency of water, energy, etc. to improve the sustainability of agriculture and food processing

・ Procure biomass from farmers to secure alternative fuels and contribute to increasing farmers' income

・ Contribute to the collection and analysis of data in agriculture etc.

3Good Health and

Well-being

・ Providing low-cost medical devices and services that meet the health needs of low- and middle-income countries

・ Providing health care services to employees and their families at the destination

・ Introduce high safety standards to reduce the risk of morbidity and death due to industrial accidents such as

hazardous substances and air pollution etc.

4Quality

Education

・ Providing training of expertise and management skills to local staff at the destination

・ Providing environmentally friendly training to local suppliers

・ Invest in nearby educational facilities to develop future local employees and suppliers etc.

5 Gender Equality

・ Establish a working environment that encourages the hiring, training, and retention of female employees at the

destination.

・ Supporting female workers to be promoted to supervisory positions at their destinations etc.

6Clean Water and

Sanitation

・ Reduce water consumption in the manufacturing process at the destination

・ Manufactures water treatment facilities and related parts to prevent wastewater pollution

・ Continuously monitor the water quality around the production facility at the destination etc.

7Affordable and

Clean Energy

・ Increase the utilization ratio of renewable energy

・ Develop technologies and products that contribute to reducing Co2 emissions

・ Develop and manufacture products and parts that operate using renewable energy sources etc.

8

Decent Work

and Economic

Growth

・ Increase local procurement and manufacturing in emerging markets

・ Promote high-level safety and health at manufacturing facilities, etc. at the destination

・ Invest in technology that reduces the risk of accidents at production sites at the destination etc.

68

Examples of SDGs initiatives in overseas business development①

５

Source: JBIC Strategic Research Department based on the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) "SDG Industry Matrix"


This table was attached to the questionnaire as a reference for consideration.

No. Logo Examples of SDGs initiatives in oversea business development

9Industry, Innovation

and Infrastructure

・ Contribute to the construction of public infrastructure and resource infrastructure at business development

destinations

Design products and components that minimize the risk of marine pollution

・ Contribute to the development of local industrial base through local procurement and local employment at the

destination etc.

10 Reduce Inequality

・ Pay appropriate living wages to staff at the destination

・ Providing he opportunity to acquire the skills necessary to get a profession at the destination for local

workers

・ Introduce a policy that prohibits all forms of discrimination at the destination etc.

11Sustainable Cities and

Communities

・ Develop products that increase energy efficiency in homes and offices

・ Providing products and technologies that contribute to energy conservation in cities

・ At the destination, obtain the cooperation of the local community in advance before land development to

mitigate the impact on culturally important places etc.

12Responsible

Consumption and

Production

・ Improve energy efficiency in factories and distribution at the destination

・ Introduce measures to reduce fossil fuel combustion at factories at the destination

・ Promote waste reduction, recycling, and recycling at the destination etc.

13 Climate Action・ Invest in research and development of Co2 capture and storage methods

・ Introduce equipment and systems that reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the destination etc.

14 Life Below Water・ Introduce a waste treatment system at the destination to avoid the release of pollutants into the sea

・ Design products and components that minimize the risk of marine pollution etc.

15 Life on Land ・ Introduce measures to avoid or mitigate risks to the local ecosystem at the destination etc.

16Peace and Justice

Strong Institutions

・ Supporting anti-corruption efforts at the destination

・ Promote a culture of fair trade at the destination etc.

17Partnerships for the

Goal

・ Providing relevant information and expertise to policy makers to support the establishment of practical

environmental regulations

・ Participate in initiatives to promote sustainable development etc.

69

５ Examples of SDGs initiatives in overseas business development②


Survey Report on Overseas Business Operations

by Japanese Manufacturing CompaniesResults of the JBIC 2020 Survey

Takeshi Kasuga (Lead Author, chapter 1)

Natsuka Ogawa (chapter 2)

Risa Fujii (chapter 3 and 4)

Erika Nakahara (chapter 5)

Nao Tsuji (proofread)

JAPAN BANK for INTERNATINOAL COOPERATION

January 2021

Ⓒ2021 Japan Bank for International Cooperation

Website : https://www.jbic.go.jp

(For further information)

JAPAN BANK for INTERNATINOAL COOPERATION (JBIC)

4-1, Ohtemachi 1-chome, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8144, Japan

Strategic Research Department, Corporate Planning Group

Telephone: +81-3-5218-9244 (Group direct line)

Facsimile: +81-3-5218-9696

E-mail : [email protected]

If you have a request for some interview, lecture etc.,

please contact to Press and External Affairs Division (+81-3-5218-3100)

mailto:[email protected]

survey report on overseas business operations by ......transportation equipment (excl. automobiles)...

Documents